Legality of Cannabis by U.S. Jurisdiction

Content deleted Content added
→‎How to review an article: this one is pretty good
→‎How to nominate an article: add per talk page discussion
Line 26: Line 26:


To '''withdraw''' a nomination '''before''' the review has begun, remove the {{tl|GA nominee}} from the article talk page. If you wish to withdraw a nomination '''after''' the review has begun, then the nomination must be closed using the '''[[#Fail|fail]]''' process to record the outcome of the review.
To '''withdraw''' a nomination '''before''' the review has begun, remove the {{tl|GA nominee}} from the article talk page. If you wish to withdraw a nomination '''after''' the review has begun, then the nomination must be closed using the '''[[#Fail|fail]]''' process to record the outcome of the review.

Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination.


| style="padding:0.7em; border:1px solid #107020; background-color:#f0ffea; vertical-align:top;" |
| style="padding:0.7em; border:1px solid #107020; background-color:#f0ffea; vertical-align:top;" |

Revision as of 03:15, 20 November 2012

Good article nominations

Good article nominations
Good article nominations

Wikipedia:Good articles is a list of articles that meet a core set of editorial standards but are not featured article quality. The Good article nominations page provides a list of articles which have been nominated for Good article status, as well as instructions for nominators and reviewers. Articles can be nominated by anyone, and reviewed by any registered user who has not contributed significantly to the article. There are currently 641 nominations listed and 549 waiting to be reviewed.

How to nominate an article

If you believe an article meets the Good article criteria, you may nominate it in the following way (please read the guide for nominating good articles for further advice):

  1. Find the most appropriate subsection/subtopic from those listed on the right. If you are not sure which subsection is best, use "Miscellaneous".
  2. Add {{subst:GAN|subtopic=name of the subsection on this page where the article is to be listed}} to the top of the nominated article's talk page.

If you've completed these two steps successfully, a bot will post your nomination on this page within 20 minutes.

It may take several weeks for your nomination to be reviewed, as there are usually many open nominations. Do not start the review page yourself as this may lead other reviewers to believe that your nomination is already under review. If you are a registered user, you are encouraged to help by reviewing other articles.

To leave a note related to the review, edit the note parameter of {{GA nominee}} on the article talk page. For example: {{GA nominee|...|note=I might not be able to respond to the review until next week. ~~~~}} This note will appear beneath the article's entry on this page.

To withdraw a nomination before the review has begun, remove the {{GA nominee}} from the article talk page. If you wish to withdraw a nomination after the review has begun, then the nomination must be closed using the fail process to record the outcome of the review.

Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination.

Nomination topics and subtopics

How to review an article

When choosing an article to review, keep in mind:

  • that only registered users may review articles—make sure you are logged in;
  • you cannot review an article if you are the nominator or have made significant contributions to it prior to the review;
  • you should not pass an article that was put on hold by another editor without assessing the problem;
  • nominations towards the tops of the lists are older, and should be given higher priority, except where the nominator has other articles under review.
  1. Start a review page, either by following the start review link in the nomination's entry on this page, or by using the link from the template on the article talk page. If you wish, you can add an initial review or other remarks to the bottom of the review page before saving it. A bot will change the Good article nominations page to indicate that you are reviewing the article.
  2. Before reading the article in detail, check it for immediate problems. If you believe a detailed review is premature, add your reasons to the review page and use the fail process; otherwise continue with the next steps.
  3. Read the whole article, and decide whether it should pass or fail based on the Good article criteria. You can also put the article "on hold" or ask for a second opinion. The review process itself should take, at most, two weeks.
  4. Provide a detailed review of the article on the review page. If you wish, you can organize your critique using checklists such as {{subst:FGAN}}, {{subst:GAList}}, {{subst:GAList2}}, {{subst:GATable}}, {{subst:GABox}}, {{subst:GAProgress}} or {{subst:GAHybrid}}, and inform the nominator of your actions using {{subst:GANotice}} or {{subst:GANotice2}}.
Where the article meets the Good article criteria, you might like to consider making suggestions for further improvements if appropriate. Where it does not meet the Good article criteria, explain which criteria are not met, and detail the problems to help other editors improve the article. If a problem is easy to resolve, you are encouraged (but not required) to be bold and fix it yourself.

Review carefully—see Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles for more advice or you can ask questions at the Good article help desk.

Pass

If you feel the article meets the Good article criteria:

  1. Replace {{GA nominee}} on the article's talk page with {{GA|~~~~~|topic=|page=}}.[1] The "page=" parameter should be a number only - no letters. Please include "GA" in your edit summary.
  2. List the article on Wikipedia:Good articles under the appropriate section.[2] Encourage the successful nominator(s) to review an article themselves.
  3. Add {{Good article}} to the article (It doesn't matter where this is placed as it will automatically present itself at the top of the page).

Fail

If you feel the article does not meet the Good article criteria:

  1. Replace {{GA nominee}} on the article's talk page with {{FailedGA|~~~~~|topic=|page=}}.[1] Please include "GA" in your edit summary.
  2. Encourage the nominator(s) to renominate the article once the problems have been addressed.

On hold

You may put an article "On Hold" for a period of time, generally one week:

  1. On the talk page of the article set the GAN status parameter to "onhold", as in {{GA nominee|...|status=onhold}}
  2. Don't forget to specify on the review page what needs to be done.

Second opinion

If you are unsure whether an article meets the Good article criteria, you may ask another reviewer or subject expert for a second opinion:

  1. On the talk page of the article set the GAN status parameter to "2ndopinion" as in {{GA nominee|...|status=2ndopinion}}
  2. Don't forget to specify on the review page what needs to be done.
  1. ^ a b The five tildes supply the date of the review. The topic parameter refers to the topic abbreviations used on the GA page, but the template automatically converts GAN subtopics into GA topics, so reviewers can simply copy the parameter value from one template to the other. "Page" should be the number of the review subpage (that is, the n in {{Talk:ArticleName/GAn}}).
  2. ^ You may also want to update any WikiProject templates on the article talk page, but this is optional. You do not need to update the "recently listed good articles" page: this will be done automatically by a bot.