Content deleted Content added
→October: request to participate |
→May: +3 |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{pp|small=yes}} |
|||
{{Notice|Due to frequent inappropriate attempts by users to add themselves to the list, the page may occasionally be protected. In which case, if you wish to use the Helper Script, please make an '''[[WP:edit request|edit request]]''' here.}} |
|||
This page is for requesting access to the [[WP:AFCH|AFC Helper script]]. If you wish to ''discuss'' this list, its requirements, or AFCH in general, do so at [[WT:AFC|the main talk page]]. |
|||
{{archives}} |
|||
__NONEWSECTIONLINK__ |
|||
{{Archive basics |
|||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
|counter = 1 |
|||
|Maxsize = 100K |
|||
}} |
|||
<blockquote>If you wish to join the project you need to request permission here. Remember, you '''MUST have 500 <TT>ARTICLE</TT> edits!!!''' Thanks!</blockquote> |
|||
=Requests= |
=Requests= |
||
* All archived requests older than one month can be found at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants/Old Requests]]. |
|||
* We generally do not notify users of acceptances, so check back often. |
|||
* Non-admins should refrain from closing reviews. |
|||
<!-- |
|||
ALL NEW REQUESTS SHOULD GO AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS SECTION |
|||
IF YOU PLACE A REQUEST AT THE TOP OF THIS SECTION IT WILL BE IGNORED |
|||
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU START YOUR REQUEST WITH A * - example: |
|||
* Please add me to the project because... ~~~~ |
|||
--> |
|||
=== September 2017 === |
|||
*Hi there, making a request to join, I am already a new pages reviewer and I think I can help here too. [[User:Domdeparis|Domdeparis]] ([[User talk:Domdeparis|talk]]) 14:57, 30 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 00:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Requesting to be added to list; I vastly exceed the numerical requirements and I understand policy. Also, please update instructions at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants]] which currently states ''"please add yourself to the active reviewers list below"'', something I can't do. |
|||
:--[[User:Nanite|Nanite]] ([[User talk:Nanite|talk]]) 20:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 01:09, 4 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::Instructions have been updated again. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 21:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Requesting to be added to the list. I noticed you have quite the backlog I love working on backlogs. <b><font color="#3399FF">[[User:Whispering|Whispe]]</font><font color="#DEB887">[[User talk:Whispering|ring]]</font></b> 20:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 01:23, 4 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, but you added him into the wrong place. <big>[[User:-- -- --|'''--''']] [[User talk:-- -- --|'''--''']] [[Special:Contributions/-- -- --|'''--''']]</big> 20:36, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{Fixed}} by Primefac. Thanks, <big>[[User:-- -- --|'''--''']] [[User talk:-- -- --|'''--''']] [[Special:Contributions/-- -- --|'''--''']]</big> 20:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I am requesting to be added to the list of participants. Willing to help reduce the backlog. [[User:HitroMilanese|<font color="Green" face="Times New Roman" size="4">'''Hitro'''</font>]][[User Talk:HitroMilanese|<font color="#FF00FF" face="courier" size="1">''' talk'''</font>]] 21:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I would like to add myself and take part in this AFC project. [[User:Passion1000|Passion1000]] ([[User talk:Passion1000|talk]]) 04:36, 5 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{not done}} - questionable creations (and recreations). Please get some more experience in page creation before re-applying. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:39, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
{{edit fully-protected|Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants|answered=yes}} |
|||
*I would like to be listed as a participant as i have 500 edits <span style="background-color: purple">[[User:Flow234|<span style="color: Pink">Flow 234 (Nina)</span>]] [[User talk:Flow234|<span style="color: pink">talk</span>]]</span> 09:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:EP --> — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:46, 5 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Please add me to the project --[[User:Tiven2240|'''<span style="background color: black; color: orange">✝iѵ</span><span style="color: blue">ɛɳ</span>'''<span style="color: green">२२४०</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Tiven2240|<span style="color: maroon">†ลℓк †๏ мэ</span>]]</sup> 05:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{not done}}. Issues with NPP and other questionable edits. Please gain some more positive experience in page creation and editing before re-applying. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
{{edit fully-protected|Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants|answered=yes}} |
|||
*I would like to be added to the list, please. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 13:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:EP --> [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:24, 12 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
{{edit fully-protected|Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants|answered=yes}} |
|||
* I would like to participate, I have about 2200 edits, about 700 in article space. [[User:Aguyintobooks|<font color=" #376D18"><u>'''Α Guy into Books'''</u>™</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Aguyintobooks|§]] ([[User talk:Aguyintobooks|<font color="#000E5E">''Message''</font>]]) - 15:16, 12 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Yes check.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Done'''<!-- Template:EP --> {{ping|Aguyintobooks}}, welcome aboard! — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 08:00, 13 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* I would like to join in order to help with reviewing the articles related to combat sports. Thank you [[User:Parviziskender|Parviziskender]] ([[User talk:Parviziskender|talk]]) 02:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{not done}}. Please read the instructions again. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 13:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* Please add me to the participants list. You can see my stats at [http://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/en.wikipedia.org/Kaldari]. Thanks! [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] ([[User talk:Kaldari|talk]]) 20:16, 14 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}} [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 20:37, 14 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Requesting to rejoin the project after a break. '''<span style="font-family: Courier">[[User:DrStrauss|<span style="color: blue">Dr</span><span style="color: darkblue">Strauss</span>]] [[User talk:DrStrauss|<span style="color: purple">talk</span>]]</span>''' 20:45, 16 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{done}}. Welcome back. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 22:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Requesting to be added to the list. I have a very large amount of fully-referenced pages created, so I think it's clear that I understand the guidelines very well.<sub><small>[[User:Zxcvbnm|ZXCVBNM]] ([[User Talk:Zxcvbnm|TALK]])</small></sub> 03:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:31, 17 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Requesting to be added to list. I am a university professor. I am on sabbatical this term, and would like to help out. I work with students often, and enjoy helping new writers. I have read and understand the reviewing instructions. I am familiar with Wikipedia policies and procedures, and understand how the write a draft which helps to establish notability of the subject. Thank you for your time. [[User:Bythebooklibrary|Bythebooklibrary]] ([[User talk:Bythebooklibrary|talk]]) 08:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{not done}} You need 500 live edits. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 09:17, 18 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*::Kindly, will someone please revisit the live edit totals when you have a moment. Thank you. Cheers! [[User:Bythebooklibrary|Bythebooklibrary]] ([[User talk:Bythebooklibrary|talk]]) 12:44, 18 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Looks like 413 article-space edits. Feel free to re-apply when you meet ''all'' of the conditions. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:20, 18 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*::::One last check please. {{U|Primefac}} Thanks for your patience, [[User:Bythebooklibrary|Bythebooklibrary]] ([[User talk:Bythebooklibrary|talk]]) 11:56, 20 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* I have new page reviewer rights, have experience with dealing new pages. I fulfill all the criteria to become an AfC reviewer. - [[User:Mar11|Mar11]] ([[User talk:Mar11|talk]]) 09:27, 19 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:31, 20 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I just want to review a single article ([[Draft:Naturkunde-Museum Bielefeld]]). Please add me to the list, so that I can accept it, or, even better, just accept yourself! --[[User:Jens Lallensack|Jens Lallensack]] ([[User talk:Jens Lallensack|talk]]) 20:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{not done}}. Sorry, we do not accord this tool so that editors can review and pass their own creations or articles they have substantially contributed to. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 04:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Hello, I'd like to be added to the list. I meet the requirements and I've also recently gotten the new page reviewer rights and have been working through that backlog, so I have some experience with reviewing new pages. --[[User:Nerd1a4i|Nerd1a4i]] ([[User talk:Nerd1a4i|talk]]) 14:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::<small>'''Comments''' - Comparatively limited mainspace contributions, although above the 500 limit. Recent articles like [[Principles of Quantum Mechanics|this]], consisting mostly of a table of contents raise some concerns, as does overall low [http://tools.wmflabs.org/afdstats/afdstats.py?name=Nerd1a4i&max=&startdate=&altname= AfD participation] with mixed results and comparatively weak deletion rationales. May recommend a month or two of increased participation in AfD and NPP to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of deletion policy, and likelihood that a draft would survive an AfD nomination. [[User:GreenMeansGo|<span style="font-family:Impact"><span style="color:#07CB4B">G</span><span style="color:#449351">M</span><span style="color:#35683d">G</span></span>]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|<sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk</sup>]] 13:57, 29 September 2017 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:: '''Comment''': I've started to participate more in AfD, and I've done quite a bit of new page reviewing recently. My CSD record is good, and my edit number is around 4 times the 500 limit. Although some of my new articles are stubs, they still show notability as per wikipedia policies. --[[User:Nerd1a4i|Nerd1a4i]] ([[User talk:Nerd1a4i|talk]]) 16:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Request to join. Hello. Please add me to the participants page. I intend, if accepted, to work on the backlog. I have found one article already, which needs an auth tag, and is clearly notable. Thanks. [[User:Scope creep|Scope creep]] ([[User talk:Scope creep|talk]]) 11:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::<small>'''Strong support''' - Long time contributor. Occasionally misses the mark at AfD, but hits is ~80% of the time. Overall, nearly 500 articles created, and only deletion is G7. Already granted Autopatrolled and NPP. Clean block log over 12 years of editing. [[User:GreenMeansGo|<span style="font-family:Impact"><span style="color:#07CB4B">G</span><span style="color:#449351">M</span><span style="color:#35683d">G</span></span>]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|<sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk</sup>]] 14:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 17:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Request for access - I am a long-time editor who is not quite as active as I used to be. However, I love the idea of helping others get their first articles into Wikipedia, or give them guidance to make their first submissions successful when appropriate. [[User:Eric1985|Eric]] ([[User talk:Eric1985|talk]]) 19:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::<small>'''Comment''' - This user has nearly no AfD participation, and has no participation within the past several years. The [[FinCon|single article]] they have created within the past year has multiple issues and is based solely on the official homepage for the subject. This and previous articles created raise substantial issues with their ability to write in and evaluate [[WP:NPOV]], as well as their understanding of [[WP:RS|sourcing]] and [[WP:N|notability]] requirements. [[User:GreenMeansGo|<span style="font-family:Impact"><span style="color:#07CB4B">G</span><span style="color:#449351">M</span><span style="color:#35683d">G</span></span>]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|<sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk</sup>]] 14:22, 29 September 2017 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:::{{not done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 17:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* Hi, Please grant me access, so that i can also contribute more on Wikipedia. Thanks. [[User:Jeromeenriquez|Jeromeenriquez]] ([[User talk:Jeromeenriquez|talk]]) 11:55, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::<small>'''Comment''' - This user has had one [[Draft:The Indian Missionary Society|declined AfC submission]] within the past 10 days. [[User:GreenMeansGo|<span style="font-family:Impact"><span style="color:#07CB4B">G</span><span style="color:#449351">M</span><span style="color:#35683d">G</span></span>]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|<sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk</sup>]] 14:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:::{{not done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 17:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Please add me to the list. [[User:Cherkash|cherkash]] ([[User talk:Cherkash|talk]]) 21:48, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I'd like to help - please add me to the list. --[[User:Slashme|Slashme]] ([[User talk:Slashme|talk]]) 22:27, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
===October=== |
|||
*Request to join. Have fulfilled criteria. [[User:Alphalfalfa|alphalfalfa]]<sup>([[User talk:Alphalfalfa|talk]])</sup> 17:19, 1 October 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* Requesting to participate. I have met the criteria as established. --[[User:Caorongjin|Caorongjin]] ([[User talk:Caorongjin|talk]]) 18:39, 1 October 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Requesting to participate. 20,000 edit count, meet/ exceed all criteria --[[user:KDS4444|KDS4444]] <sup>([[user talk:KDS4444|talk]])</sup> 02:44, 2 October 2017 (UTC) |
|||
= General discussion = |
|||
== Unqualified user == |
|||
I have removed {{U|Susana Hodge}} from the list. The barely 400 mainspace edits were very minor and mostly made during the past 48 hours. A request at PERM for New Page Reviewer was also declined for the same reason. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 13:43, 6 January 2017 (UTC) |
|||
Another 8 additions have been reverted in the last three weeks. This is getting ridiculous - don't you all agree? [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 13:23, 5 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree. I've always thought the page should be full protected and requests be made in talk page, so that admins can review their edits and see what they are up to. Regards—[[User:UY Scuti|<font color="cornflowerblue" face="Times">'''UY Scuti'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:UY Scuti|<font color="green" face="Times">Talk</font>]]</sup> 15:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::What if the participants list was fully protected, we should've set up a [[WP:PERM|PERM]] page just like requesting other permissions? [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color: pink; color: white">'''KGirlTrucker81'''</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:KGirlTrucker81|<span style= "color:pink">huh?</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/KGirlTrucker81|what I've been doing]]</sup> 18:32, 5 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::While I don't think having a PERM setup is necessary (we have the "requests" thread at the top of this page), I can agree with further protection. |
|||
:::On a somewhat related note, I've cleared out the inactives - 9 editors who haven't edited in 2+ months, 48 who haven't reviewed a page in 6+ months. This leaves us with 152 reviewers and DGG's alt account. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 18:35, 5 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I have just removed yet another new inscription ({{U|Wakowako}}) with the rationale <br>''Hi. We appreciate your enthusiasm but 83 mainspace edits in the last 4 years out of a total of only 800 since 2012 does not demonstrate a good understanding of the policies mentioned in the reviewing instructions or provide an indication that you intend to return to regular editing. Please make three months of significant consistent contributions, then you will be prepared for reviewing drafts.''<br> |
|||
:We're currently running at well over 20% of new enrollments being reverted. I seriously think it's time now to fully protect the page to the extent that users must at least make an edit request to be included on the list. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 13:47, 6 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::[[User:Kudpung]] this user has turned out to be an undisclosed paid editor using sock puppets. I imagine they declined this AFC[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Sunnie_Giles&diff=prev&oldid=758583749] and than emailed the person in question regarding money to get the article created. |
|||
::Yes we need to moderate who can do this work. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 06:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
== Adding myself to the project == |
|||
So, let's have a discussion on whether I be allowed to add myself to the project or not. I've been approving redirect requests on [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects]], and I added myself to this database in order to use [[User:PhantomTech/scripts/AFCRHS.js]]. See [[User_talk:Ethanbas#AFC_Redirects]] for some discussion. I understand the COI issue, but all I've been doing is approving redirect requests. Not putting myself on the list of participants hurts my ability to approve redirect request, which at least [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] is glad I've been doing this work. Pinging [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color: pink; color: white">'''KGirlTrucker81'''</span>]], relevant active editor on the redirects for creation page. [[User:Ethanbas|Ethanbas]] <sup>([[User_talk:Ethanbas|talk]])</sup> 06:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:{{re|Ethanbas}} Well, yes and looking over your edit count, I see a bunch of mainspace edits. You can freely add yourself but unfortunately, you're an paid editor and that's why {{noping|Kudpung}} reverted you. [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color: pink; color: white">'''KGirlTrucker81'''</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:KGirlTrucker81|<span style= "color:pink">huh?</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/KGirlTrucker81|what I've been doing]]</sup> 13:34, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I have no issue with the work at AFC redirects: it gets a backlog at some points and it's a bit more difficult to create paid promotional content that way. I agree with {{u|Kudpung}}'s concerns with the paid-editing for AfC in general, however. It's a tricky subject and it could place Ethanbas in the place where he would be approving other contributions that were bankrolled by the same funder (there is at least one other editor I've seen who has the same funder.) i also have concerns with what Ethanbas considers appropriate articles to be created and have had strong disagreements with him in the past re: BLP policy. That being said his recent work with presidential timelines has been good. It's a tough case, but I'm willing to lean on Kudpung's side here, though like I said, I think redirect work would be fine. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 14:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::To further clarify: I think Ethanbas has no business reviewing drafts and agree with everything Kudpung has said below. I don't think the redirects harm anything, but fully support the removal from the participants group. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 17:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*The many issues reported on {{U|Ethanbas}}' talk page would appear to demonstrate that he lacks sufficient competency for reviewing tasks. Just one example of his own creations can be seen at [[Andy Baukol]]. I contend that anyone who intends to police articles shoud know how to produce them. There are also the issues of paid editing and COI and certainly a temperament that I do not believe contributes to a healthy collaborative environment. {{U|Bishonen}} may also wish to comment here.[[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 16:30, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I agree with Kudpung. Ethanbas should not be reviewing drafts. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 17:10, 19 February 2017 (UTC) |
|||
== Removal of Morphdog == |
|||
<div class="anonymous-show boilerplate metadata" style="background:#dee; border:1px solid #00c; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;; padding: 1em; width:70%">Sorry, [[WP:IP|unregistered users]] cannot be granted permissions due to technical restrictions. [[WP:ACCOUNT|Create an account]] to request permissions.</div><div class="user-show"> |
|||
I hate removing well-meaning editors from the AFCH list, but enough has happened recently to make me concerned that {{u|Morphdog}} is not able to do the task to the standards we would like. My concerns are as follows: |
|||
:;(<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants|action=edit§ion=new&nosummary=true&preload=Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Preload&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:{{lc:{{#titleparts:AFC helper script}}}}}}}} add request]</span>) |
|||
*[[User_talk:Morphdog/Archive_1#Inaccurate_pending_changes_reviewing|Not checking a pending change]] for accuracy (this was before they joined AFCH) |
|||
{{Shortcut|WT:AFCP}}{{TOCRIGHT}} |
|||
*[[User_talk:Morphdog#16:19:36.2C_31_March_2017_review_of_submission_by_Msboogaloo|Decline of a draft]] based on an AFD for a different person. |
|||
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background:#dee; border:1px solid #00c; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;; padding: 1em; width:70%"><noinclude> |
|||
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aaron_Buchanan&diff=773843092&oldid=773646463 This reply] indicating a lack of understanding of sourcing. |
|||
'''Review the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants|Criteria]] before making a request.''' |
|||
I certainly don't think that they have been acting in bad faith, but I think it would be best if they held off on reviewing drafts until they feel more comfortable with it. Maybe a mentor? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:35, 4 April 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Administrators and new page reviewers are automatically approved and do not need to be added to the list. |
|||
*If approved, consider adding yourself to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/List of reviewers by subject|the list of reviewers by subject]]. |
|||
</div></div> |
|||
<div style="display:flex; flex-direction:row; flex-wrap:wrap; gap:1em; justify-content:center; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em;"> |
|||
== Removal of Moist towelett == |
|||
<div> |
|||
I've taken the liberty of removing {{u|Moist towelett}} from the AfC participants' list after [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Patrick_Meaney&diff=prev&oldid=788040972 two] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:51°_North&diff=prev&oldid=788040935 improper] G13s and vandalism on [[Recep Tayyip Erdoğan]]. If any administrator or AfC reviewer thinks I've overstepped my bounds, they are welcome to restore the user to the list. [[User:Wiae|/wiae]] [[User talk:Wiae|<small>/tlk</small>]] 15:49, 29 June 2017 (UTC) |
|||
<inputbox> |
|||
* [[User:Wiae|Wiae]] I've reported them for vandalism over on commons as well - clearly not acting in a way we would expect here - 100% agree with removal. Cheers [[User:KylieTastic|KylieTastic]] ([[User talk:KylieTastic|talk]]) 16:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC) |
|||
type=fulltext |
|||
prefix=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants/Old Requests/ |
|||
break=no |
|||
width=35 |
|||
placeholder = Search previous requests |
|||
searchbuttonlabel = Search |
|||
</inputbox> |
|||
</div> |
|||
</div> |
|||
==April== |
|||
==Additions to the user list== |
|||
===NPR (April)=== |
|||
'''Does anybody''' ever follow this talk page beyond me and {{U|Wiae}} ? |
|||
====[[User:GraziePrego]]==== |
|||
:I have removed three more inappropriate additions to the list in the last 48 hours alone, one of whom (only 180 or so edits) edit warred over it to the point that I was obliged to full protect the page for a few hours - this individual's intention was quite obviously to use AfC to accept his own, multiple declined submissions. I would be interested to know just what percent of additions got removed over the past 12 months. |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=GraziePrego}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:The 90/500 rule that I obtained for AfC will only work if we increase the vigilance over the list page or sharpen the way additions are made. To do this we can consider all or any of the suggestions below, some of which are more realistic than others, and would probably not receive my own support: |
|||
:Just noticed I'm not on the list of reviewers, but I've been a reviewer with AFCH tool usage for a while now :) Can I be added to the list please? [[User:GraziePrego|GraziePrego]] ([[User talk:GraziePrego|talk]]) 04:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [[User:GraziePrego|GraziePrego]] ([[User talk:GraziePrego|talk]]) 04:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
#Permanently full protect the page so that requests to join it will have to be handled by an administrator. |
|||
::Those with the NPR permission are given access to AFCH automatically, and don't need to be on the list. [[User:LittlePuppers|LittlePuppers]] ([[User talk:LittlePuppers|talk]]) 03:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
#Request the use of the Helper Script through PERM in much the same way that AWB is. I.E. also requiring admin approval. |
|||
#Hold a mini RfA-style vote over each request for the tools. |
|||
#Add a script/filter to the page that will physically prevent people without the required basic 90/500 from adding themselves to the page. This is however, would not be a a 100% perfect solution as some users make 500 very minor edits in order to deliberately game the system. |
|||
#Add a script/filter to all draft pages so that the Helper Script can only be used on them by an accredited AfC reviewer. |
|||
#Restrict moves to mainspace of Drafts to accredited AfC reviewers and New Page Reviewers (also abused in the past however by AfC reviewers themselves. |
|||
===Inactive (April)=== |
|||
I think we would all welcome people's thoughts on these ideas. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 00:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Gryllida]]==== |
|||
:I regularly patrol the new additions, but I have been rather busy lately and most of the additions-then-subsequent-removals happen before I see them. I don't think fully protecting the page would make a whole lot of sense given that well-meaning and experienced editors like Atsme wouldn't be able to join. |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Gryllida}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:On the stats side of things, I've [[User:Primefac/AFCStats|been keeping track]] of the AFCH list statistics (and cleaning it out) since December. Haven't done June yet, but in general we gain about 10-15 and lose about 15-20 per month. This, of course, is not counting the extended-confirmed users who do not actually meet the requirements and are immediately removed; I haven't bothered tracking those stats as I'm more interested in the "boots on the ground" so to speak. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 00:17, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:Was helping previously, with access having expired due to inactivity. Keen to resume activity now. Please re-add me to participants list. Thanks [[User:Gryllida|Gryllida]] ([[User talk:Gryllida|talk]], [[Special:EmailUser/Gryllida|e-mail]]) 22:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If the list were full protected,anyone like {{U|Atsme}} can easily join it if they fulfill the conditions. All they have to do is make an edit request. That's the whole idea of it, in much the same way as making a request at PERM for AWB (not to be confused with formal user rights). Anyone (90/500 + demonstrated experience) who is in a hurry to start reviewing (why should they be that?) could always ping me. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 01:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:: |
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
::::I don't ''really'' think we have to go the whole PERM route either - that will happen soon enough when AfC and NPP get merged, but we do need to do something about the trolling and those who try to game the system to review their own creations. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 03:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{u|Kudpung}} & {{u|Primefac}} my 6th sense called me here or what you guys refer to as a "ping". A brief little FYI - I first arrived at AfC yesterday looking for a user count template to add to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Atsme&diff=789273774&oldid=789273342 counter strip] on my TP but couldn't find one, so I joined instead - seems I can't get enough volunteer work to consume my day. [[File:SMirC-worry.svg|x20px|8-[]] As a sidenote, I manually counted 171+/- active reviewers, a rather stark difference to NPP's 435. Why? Then I stumbled across a warning banner about the latest scam describing a form of extortion - can't recall where I first saw it - but it or something similar is being discussed at [[Wikipedia_talk:Conflict_of_interest#Unsolicited contacts from paid editors]]. That incentivized the {{Justcurious}} in me, so I sought more info, Googled and found yet another [http://wikiexperts.biz/en/about paid editing outlet] you prolly already know about. If the goal of WP is to have independent companies with teams of paid editors writing our articles and dictating what is/isn't published in WP, then all the community has to do is stay on course with their current "rules of engagement", and ignore what y'all have been trying to get implemented. I'm of the mind that because of all the resistance (which probably includes a substantial # of shadow paid editors) our efforts to fix things will be more like a [http://easyscienceforkids.com/all-about-the-little-dutch-boy-who-saved-holland/ Hans Brinker fairytale]...and guess what? I'm an optimist. It's not difficult for one to conclude that WP will be dominated by paid editors, and granted, we will have quality articles but most will be about commercial entities, unnotable CEOs and aspiring authors and musicians (and the list is growing). Articles with real EV are in grave jeopardy unless serious action is taken. How could we not be concerned over seeing what appears to be an inevitable decline in WP:FA about historic events and people, if we haven't already, because paid editors are busy writing promotional articles. <sup><font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">[[User:Atsme|Atsme]]</font>[[User talk:Atsme |📞]][[Special:EmailUser/Atsme|📧]]</sup> 14:20, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::::{{U|Atsme}}, I have replied on your talk page. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 14:42, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Sahaib]]==== |
|||
*There are plenty of people already just moving their pages into mainspace themselves- whether deliberate gaming or bored of waiting for a review, I don't know. I support "add a script/filter to the page that will physically prevent people without the required basic 90/500 from adding themselves to the page" but disagree with screening everybody and making them jump through an extra hurdle with an edit request, I fear that this will turn into PERM and lead to less people wanting to join (as they don't want to go through the questions). BTW I have this page watchlisted, I just feel its better if an admin formally says no. [[User:Jcc|jcc]] ([[User talk:Jcc#top|tea and biscuits]]) 17:00, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Sahaib}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I used to contribute to [[WP:AFD]] and would like to review more articles. I am less busy nowadays as well, former name was [[User:Sahaib3005]]. [[User:Sahaib|Sahaib]] ([[User talk:Sahaib|talk]]) 07:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:-noah-]]==== |
|||
::I've had the page watchlisted for years, it's just somebody else always gets around to checking the permissions first. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 17:14, 7 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=-noah-}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:Hi! I used to be a probationary reviewer a while ago but then I stopped being active and my permissions expired. Thanks! [[User:-noah-|<span style="font-family:sans-serif; color:#228B22; text-shadow:#009200 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''Noah'''</span>]] [[User_talk:-noah-|<sup>💬</sup>]] 00:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Name change (April)=== |
|||
*That's now six who have been removed this week. If there are no strong objections, I would put this page under full protection temporarily for two weeks to see what happens. I can't really see that having to make an edit request would deter a serious, potential reviewer. There is a backlog, but having to wait an hour or two for approval isn't going to break AfC. Comments {{U|Wiae}} ? [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 21:45, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Xoak]]==== |
|||
*:Six in a week is quite a bit above average, and with the backlog back down to "normal" (i.e. 600-800) range, I can't see why people would suddenly be clamouring to join up. I'd support a short protection. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 21:49, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
{{UserAFC|1=Xoak}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:::I watchlist this page too. Restricting it to 90/500 makes sense. I oppose stopping editors from moving Drafts to main as there are 6400 pages outside AfC over a year old unedited (plus who knows how many edited within the last year.). A mini RfA seems like overkill [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 21:56, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{u|Legacypac}}, the page ''is'' EC-protected. Kudpung is suggesting short-term ''full'' protection. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 22:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::::No opinion on that. I was responding to some of the options at the beginning. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 22:56, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' - not sure to what degree the following happens, but...it's feasible that editors who don't get their submissions approved will add their names to the list thinking they can get their articles approved by doing so. At first glance, it's hard to tell if they're paid editors or COI editors, which may equate into them having ''no boundaries''. I could add to this but it would be mostly supposition which is only one gram above a brain fart so I'll hold it in.<sup><font style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">[[User:Atsme|Atsme]]</font>[[User talk:Atsme |📞]][[Special:EmailUser/Atsme|📧]]</sup> 23:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::This ''is'' precisely what they do and the reason I removed at least two of them this week. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) |
|||
*Thanks for the ping, {{u|Kudpung}}. I think a two-week full-protection trial run sounds reasonable, so I'll '''support''' this. Looks like there are enough administrators watching the page, so we shouldn't have too much of a delay if there's a legitimate talk page request during the full protection. [[User:Wiae|/wiae]] [[User talk:Wiae|<small>/tlk</small>]] 23:38, 8 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I would '''support''' indefinite full protection, creating a [[WP:Requests for permissions/Articles for creation access|PERM page]] enabling administrators to review their requests for accessing the AFC helper script and the PhatomTech AFC/R script. [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color:pink; color: purple">'''KGirlTrucker81'''</span>]]<sup> [[User talk:KGirlTrucker81|<span style= "color:purple">huh?</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/KGirlTrucker81|what I've been doing]]</sup> 20:21, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
Was renamed a bit ago from Xkalponik to Xoak.[[User:Xoak|X]] ([[User talk:Xoak|talk]]) 11:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Inactive participants == |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===New (Apr)=== |
|||
Hello, folks. Does the separation of participants into "active" and "inactive" have any real meaning? I've seen recent activity from a person who is on the Inactive list, yet appears to be using the Helper Script to accept and decline drafts. Is this a normal or acceptable practice? [[User:NewYorkActuary|NewYorkActuary]] ([[User talk:NewYorkActuary|talk]]) 12:38, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Idunnox3]]==== |
|||
:<small>Courtesy ping to {{u|Primefac}}, who [[User:Primefac/AFCStats|keeps track of the numbers]] and may have some insight into the question. [[User:Wiae|/wiae]] [[User talk:Wiae|<small>/tlk</small>]] 14:03, 9 July 2017 (UTC)</small> |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Idunnox3}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
::{{u|NewYorkActuary}}, anyone one the inactive list should not be able to use AFCH. I believe (and I might be wrong) that a bit of back-and-forth with making the lvl-3 heading into a lvl-2 heading broke things. {{u|Enterprisey}} will know the specifics of how the AFCH needs the page to look in order for it to parse the list. In the meantime, if their reviews look to be in good faith, ask them if they're really back on the project and move them back to active? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:13, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi! I'd like to contribute to [[WP:AfC]] project and now I have enough time for it. I've read the rules, and I have some [[WP:AFD]] experience to start with. [[User:Idunnox3|Idunnox3]] ([[User talk:Idunnox3|talk]]) 12:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The code is pretty simple: if the username is linked somewhere in the page, the user is allowed. (Specific line [https://github.com/WPAFC/afch-rewrite/blob/2f19566ece98b38472dbb1d917a6935aa1d2409d/src/modules/core.js#L105 here] in [https://github.com/WPAFC/afch-rewrite/blob/2f19566ece98b38472dbb1d917a6935aa1d2409d/src/modules/core.js#L100-L159 checkWhitelist].) It looks like I can just change it to only look for username links above the "Inactive reviewers" heading, right? [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 15:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{not done}}, fails minimum requirements. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Yeah, I was just noticing that myself, which means that there are 650 "inactive" users that could potentially still be using AFCH... very odd (and also somewhat problematic from a tracking perspective). I'm surprised no one has noticed that before, but it would also explain why there have only been one or two editors who have moved themselves back from inactive to active. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 15:49, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I don't know where I got the impression, but I thought the rule was -- two months of inactivity gets you moved from "active" to "inactive", and six months of inactivity gets you taken off the page altogether. And that rule seems to make some sense, because it's difficult to imagine why the page should include an ever-expanding list of inactive reviewers. [[User:NewYorkActuary|NewYorkActuary]] ([[User talk:NewYorkActuary|talk]]) 15:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::::You know, that's actually a good point as far as removing users from the inactive list (I never saw the notice in that section). I'll go through and clear out the relevant names. But yes, I move users to inactive when they either have two months with ''no'' activity, or six months with no ''reviews''. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:01, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{u|Enterprisey}}, if you could please make that change, that would be great. It might inconvenience a few folks that are still reviewing while on the inactive list, but it will make tracking a hell of a lot easier. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{u|Primefac}}, so I just wrote the code and uploaded it. I started testing it, and discovered something interesting: I was on the inactive list myself. I was a bit surprised by this, and I definitely think this could discourage someone who's coming back to reviewing after a period of time working in other areas of Wikipedia. If we already remove people who are very inactive from the list forever, what's the issue with allowing "inactive" users to use the script? [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 04:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Only one of actually tracking who is actively working on the project, I suppose. If we're going to let just ''anyone'' who is on the page use AFCH, then there isn't any reason to have an "inactive" list, because I could move someone to inactive one day and they could start back up reviewing the next. I, for one, would like to know how many people are actually/actively/want to be reviewing drafts, but I *really* don't feel like checking 700 names to see who has recently reviewed a page (150 is bad enough). Should we keep anyone who has ever added their name to the project, but might have not reviewed since 2014, as a participant? We aren't a PERM (yet), so it's not like changing one's status is that difficult. Maybe we should have a larger discussion about that, though. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::I was inactive until recently. Actually forgot what AFCH script was for. Script would not work until I moved from inactive to a active. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 02:19, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
=== |
====[[User:Shonyx]]==== |
||
* {{UserAFC|1=Shonyx}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
Based on the conversation above, what are people's thoughts regarding inactivity? Should it ''matter'' if you're on the inactive list? Should anyone who ever joined the list be considered "active" until they've gone 6 months without editing Wikipedia at all? Should we encourage users to be more active by having the "inactive" list actually ''mean'' "inactive", and require them to shift themselves back to "active" if they suddenly find themselves itching to review something? Does the sum of the squares of the sides of a triangle equal the square of the hypotenuse? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 22:46, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I have an experience with [[WP:AFD]] and reverting articles. As a participator of WikiProject Articles for creation, I have now the experience of: |
|||
*'''Disagree with inactives being removed''' I don't see any purpose for this. We need to be sure unqualified or reckless editors be kept out of AFCH use. If you're a reliable editor but real life pulls you away, why take your name off the list? Are we worried about old accounts being compromised? If so, I think it makes more sense to notice that pattern of abuse than prevent plenty of trusted editors from contributing, especially if we're talking about editors still actively editing and have control of their accounts but gave up on AfC for a time. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 22:59, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*reject/decline the draft if the draft has low on citations and no notable support between [[independent sources]] and the draft itself. |
|||
*:{{u|Chris troutman}}, for what it's worth, I'm not advocating actually ''removing'' anyone (other than those who ''have'' left Wikipedia) from the list. I'm merely continuing the discussion in the main section above (in a slightly more pointed manner) regarding the "active" and "inactive" lists we keep at the AFCH page, and why there seems to be no actual difference ''where'' someone is located. If we don't do an "inactive" list that actually ''does'' anything, then I'll make more work for myself and just combine the two lists. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 23:01, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*approve of these drafts and move them to article space if theres a connection between independent sources, affiliated sources and the draft must have a inline citations. If does the article had 1550 letters, then I slapped (means 'nominate deletion of the article) and copyright violation. |
|||
*::Ok. I don't see a good reason to have an inactive list. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 23:05, 14 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*declining of the draft submitted because breaks the [[WP:GNG]], [[WP:BIO]], etc. |
|||
*I think it's important to keep separate lists. That way we won't be lulled into a false sense of security by believing we have enough reviewers (which, for example, is what happens with the ridiculously low threshold for determining what is an active admin). [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 00:17, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
I have more than 500 edits and I have low on undeleted edits, see my [[Special:Contributions/Shonyx|contributions]] [[User:Shonyx|<b style="border-radius:1em;padding:6px;background:#b106a6;color:white;"> Shonyx </b>]]<span style="display:inline-block;margin-bottom:-0.3em;vertical-align:-0.4em;line-height:1.2em;font-size:80%;text-align:left"></span> 06:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::A good use for the inactive list is as a list to contact and encourage them to become active. If every inactive reviewer did one or two reveiws the backlog goes poof. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 02:22, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{u|Kudpung}}, the issue is one that {{u|NewYorkActuary}} mentioned above, and which I found another instance of recently myself - if someone is on the inactive list, they can still review drafts, which means that whoever is keeping track of active reviewers (i.e. me) needs to actually check ''both'' lists. This is why I asked Enterprisey if they could make it so only the "Active" list was on the tool, but there was some concern about that, hence the straw poll. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 02:51, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::I have someone on my talk page today who assumes they can't so I've moved them back to 'active'. I think it's perhaps a good idea to prevent the inactives from using the script. It raises the question of course, whether we should do the same for NPP - with only 10 -15 people doing 90% of the work, that's nearly 400 who can hardly be classed as 'active'. |
|||
::::AFAIK, some have never used the NPR right since they asked for it. I guess there are some clothes hooks in the closet bending under the strain. AfC and NPP are ridden with the same phenomenon: a magnet to young, inexperiencd, an new users, like most maintenance areas are.The problem is that once they are given the right, they find that with AfC and NPP they've bitten off more than they could chew so they throw their hat back on the rack. We don't have that same issue with vandalism and recent changes patrollers; those kids are generally happy to wade through the junk and generally do a good job. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 03:37, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:'''and one last thing I mentioned''' that my account is more than 90 days [[User:Shonyx|<b style="border-radius:1em;padding:6px;background:#b106a6;color:white;"> Shonyx </b>]]<span style="display:inline-block;margin-bottom:-0.3em;vertical-align:-0.4em;line-height:1.2em;font-size:80%;text-align:left"></span> 06:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Is there a report that shows how many reviews each person does a week or month? If so that report would answer the question of how many active reviewers there are without the effort Primefac is doing to shift names around. If there is no report, surely it could be requested. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 14:19, 15 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:: |
::{{not done}}, fails minimum requirements. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::@[[User:Primefac|Primefac]] What requirements I failed? [[User:Shonyx|<b style="border-radius:1em;padding:6px;background:#b106a6;color:white;"> Shonyx </b>]]<span style="display:inline-block;margin-bottom:-0.3em;vertical-align:-0.4em;line-height:1.2em;font-size:80%;text-align:left"></span> 05:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Such a report would also help immensely when someone claims Reviewer X made 3 mistakes. If the 3 mistakes are out of 10 reviews or out of 500 reviews makes a big difference in how we respond. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 13:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::: |
::::Your account is more than 90 days old, but that is the only requirement you seem to have met at the moment. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 06:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
::::::::There is this tool http://tools.wmflabs.org/apersonbot/afchistory/#user= It shows one user at a time, but a report could summarize the results of running names through it. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 23:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I could probably write a tool that scrapes {{tl|AFC statistics}} and makes a list showing who's reviewed recently and how many - would that help? What should the report contain? [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 18:39, 25 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:AWN08]]==== |
|||
== An observation == |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=AWN08}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I would like to review AfC primarily on British non-profit organisations, international relations, militaries and politics. [[User:AWN08|AWN08]] ([[User talk:AWN08|talk]]) 22:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{not done}} for now; a bit more content creation experience and/or deletion-related experience will help. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:NegativeMP1]]==== |
|||
Just as a note, we have [[Special:Diff/786865772|lost]] [[Special:Diff/789498379|three]] [[Special:Diff/790727669|editors]] from this project in as many weeks. While only one gives the reason, I have it on reasonably good authority that all three are related to the conduct of one editor who is pushing their POV as far as "how to do AFC reviews", overtly criticizing others and making AFC an unfriendly environment (both for reviewers and the reviewed). |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=NegativeMP1}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:Requesting AfC reviewer to help out in more general areas of Wikipedia, which includes decreasing the backlog. My account is about a year old, and while I've created very few articles overall (25~), I would say I have pretty good comprehension of the notability guidelines. I have plenty of experience in AfD, [https://afdstats.toolforge.org/afdstats.py?name=NegativeMP1 having participated in it nearly as long as I've been on Wikipedia] with a 62% success rate (+ more if you count merges). I also have a general idea of other notability guidelines, but I only say "general idea" because I don't write articles for, say, sports players. I would respond to questions quickly as I am very active on-wiki. <span style="border:#000000;border:2px solid #000000;padding:2px">'''λ''' [[User:NegativeMP1|<span style="color:#264e85">'''Negative'''</span>]][[User talk:NegativeMP1|<span style="color:#7d43b5">'''MP1'''</span>]]</span> 04:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC) <span style="border:#000000;border:2px solid #000000;padding:2px">'''λ''' [[User:NegativeMP1|<span style="color:#264e85">'''Negative'''</span>]][[User talk:NegativeMP1|<span style="color:#7d43b5">'''MP1'''</span>]]</span> 04:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== [[User:Xkalponik]] ==== |
|||
While it will do me no good to actually call out this person, I ask the ''rest'' of us to please be sure to always treat each other, and the editors whose drafts we review, with civility and respect. We are all individuals with our own opinions, and sometimes our personal interpretations of the rules and guidelines don't mesh up perfectly with one another. If you see someone doing something you don't agree with, talk to them or bring it up here. If someone is harassing you for not doing a "good enough" job, try to work it out or bring it up here. I hope that we don't lose any more good reviewers because of one or two editors who think they're better than everyone else simply because the rest of us "never nearly worked as extensive" as them. Sheer numbers matter for naught. I hope that we will eventually regain the three lost members. |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Xkalponik}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
: I've been a longtime editor with 3.5k+ edits, created (out of the 4 deleted articles 3 were self-delete) and contributed to a fair number of articles, having GA, and passed DYKs. I've participated in various WikiProjects, most notably WIR and WikiProject:Fungi. I've experience with AFDs and noticeboard discussions. For quite some time now, I'm almost regular to the wiki and if able, I hope to respond promptly to questions about my reviews. I have a good grasp of the policies and guidelines mentioned in the reviewing instructions, especially the various notability guidelines. |
|||
I'd like to help the AFC backlogs, especially with biological nomenclature articles, as I'm more often than not somewhat familiar with and passionate about these fields. [[User:Xkalponik|X]] ([[User talk:Xkalponik|talk]]) 14:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC) [[User:Xkalponik|X]] ([[User talk:Xkalponik|talk]]) 14:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
After all, we're all in this together. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC) |
|||
: |
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::@[[User:Primefac|Primefac]], Hi, my account was renamed and I got removed from the list. Could you put me back on? Thanks. (Scroll up a bit and I've formally placed a request creating a Name Change sub-section.) [[User:Xoak|X]] ([[User talk:Xoak|talk]]) 12:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Yup. For what it's worth, there was no need for a separate post. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Staraction]]==== |
|||
== Protected edit request on 15 August 2017 == |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Staraction}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I want to be able to help with the AfC backlog! I've been working with creating new articles through AfC for a while now, so I have a good idea of the requirements, especially [[WP:NOTABILITY]] (which I've learned through experience). I believe I meet the minimum requirements and would like to help more. Thanks for considering! [[User:Staraction|<span style="color: #FF9079">Star</span><span style="color: purple">action</span>]] ([[User_talk:Staraction|<span style="color: #FF9079">talk</span>]] | [[Special:Contribs/Staraction|<span style="color: purple">contribs</span>]]) 22:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Futuristicediting]]==== |
|||
{{edit fully-protected|Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants|answered=yes}} |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Futuristicediting}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
Requesting to be added to active participants. I used to be very active on the patrol, but took a long break from wikipedia. But I'm back now! [[User:Sulfurboy|Sulfurboy]] ([[User talk:Sulfurboy|talk]]) 15:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
: |
:To start a new beginning [[User:Futuristicediting|Futuristicediting]] ([[User talk:Futuristicediting|talk]]) 11:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
::{{not done}}. You were just blocked from moving pages, which will make it impossible to be a reviewer. Additionally, the recent series of rapid, useless edits to your talk page does not give me any confidence. If you continue editing disruptively, you will be blocked sitewide. — [[User:Ingenuity|Ingenuity]] ([[User talk:Ingenuity#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/Ingenuity|contribs]]) 15:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:SafariScribe]]==== |
|||
== Full protected again == |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=SafariScribe}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:Hi, I'm requesting the AFC reviewing right after reading more of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions|reviewing instructions]] to volunteer in [[WP:AFC]]. Furthermore, I have participated actively in AFD, and from my contibs, helped out in certain tasks of the encyclopedia. I have also helped in some draft reviewing, so it's a good way of helping the backlog (since it do rise each time I look at it). Thanks for the consideration.<span id="SafariScribe:1713047688991:Wikipedia_talkFTTCLNWikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants" class="FTTCmt">— <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:SafariScribe|Safari Scribe]]</span><sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/SafariScribe|'''''Edits!''''']] [[User talk:SafariScribe|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 22:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)</span> |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Shadow311]]==== |
|||
I'm getting sick of the number of people adding themselves to the list who clearly don't meet the requirements, so have fully protected the page (again), this time indefinitely. I feel the general consensus is behind this decision, but would like to ask for opinions - should this list remain fully protected, and if so, should we move requests to [[WP:PERM|PERM]]? -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 11:59, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Shadow311}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:Sounds fine to me. It makes it analogous with the New Page Reviewer Right. In fact, I don't see any logical reason why we can't just drive the list of reviewers off that - the two ought to be merged as if you can do NPP you can do AfC. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 12:06, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I would like to help lower the backlog. [[User:Shadow311|Shadow311]] ([[User talk:Shadow311|talk]]) 19:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::For drafting, I've mocked up "[[Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Articles for creation reviewer|the PERM page]]". I think having them separate would be a good stop-gap measure, but realistically merging them would make more sense -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 12:09, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} Noting this is mainly because of the AFD stats. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{ec|2}} In my view, yes per my previous comment above 2 sections. [[User:KGirlTrucker81|<span style="background-color:pink; color: purple">'''KGirl'''</span>]] [[User talk:KGirlTrucker81|<sup><span style= "color:DeepPink">(Wanna chat?)</span></sup>]] 12:11, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:CanonNi]]==== |
|||
*I concur entirely with the FP, and with {{U|Ritchie333}}'s suggestion. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 12:38, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=CanonNi}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:Hello. I would like to request access to the AfC Helper Script to help review new articles (and lower the backlog). I have over 4500 edits, with over 1500 in the mainspace, and have participated in the deletion process through CSD and AfD (though I've only started logging CSD recently). I have also created several articles and have helped others create theirs. I have thoroughly read the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions|reviewing instructions]] and will start reviewing carefully right away, if access is given. Thank you for considering my request! <code><nowiki>'''[[</nowiki>'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki></code> ([[User talk:CanonNi|talk]]<nowiki>|</nowiki>[[Special:Contributions/CanonNi|contribs]]) 23:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thank you so much! <code><nowiki>'''[[</nowiki>'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki></code> ([[User talk:CanonNi|talk]]<nowiki>|</nowiki>[[Special:Contributions/CanonNi|contribs]]) 11:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:HistoryTheorist]]==== |
|||
::As Ritchie mentioned, we could for ease of transition have the wonderful {{u|Enterprisey}} modify AFCH's `core.js` so that instead of looking at `[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants]]`, it looks at the editor's user groups, and if they have NPP then they can use the tool. Anyone wishing to review AfC drafts would then have to be a New Page Patroller, which makes sense given the similarity in both role and granting criteria -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 12:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=HistoryTheorist}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:::<s>That would be the most elegant solution to the problem. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 13:38, 18 August 2017 (UTC)</s> Wait. I'm opposed to the merging of AfC and NPP. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 13:40, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I would like to help move promising drafts into the mainspace and return the cruddier drafts back to their authors. I don't plan on using the tools much as writing/reviewing GAs is where my interests are at, though. As a content creator, I have created a few articles myself and have light AfD experience. I also got a crash course on notability from NPP school (on which I feel pretty confident about now) but never finished as my teacher went inactive. [[user:HistoryTheorist|<span style="font-family:Courier;color:#2F7E98">❤History</span>]][[User talk:HistoryTheorist|<span style="font-family:Courier;color:lightpurple">Theorist❤</span>]] 04:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::(There'sNoTime, thanks! {{(:}}) Fortunately, changing the permissions-checking code in the helper script is pretty easy (as opposed to, say, multiple decline reasons <small>gonna start testing real soon now</small>), so I'll be watching this discussion if we end up going with PERM. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 19:52, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Yeah, i think full protection here and requesting a perm for it is a great idea- in your face, paid editors- but also don't think AfC and NPR are synonymous- yet. Think that should probably wait for ACTRIAL. — [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:maroon">'''fortuna'''</span>]][[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:navy">'''''velut luna'''''</span>]] 13:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*As above, I don't have a problem with full protection here. There are always a few administrators around here who can add requesters to the list if they meet the criteria and have the requisite experience, so I don't imagine there'd be much delay for those requesters. [[User:Wiae|/wiae]] [[User talk:Wiae|<small>/tlk</small>]] 13:58, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*{{ec}}I'm with <s>OFM</s> FIM on this one - we've discussed a few times before about an NPR/AFC "merger" and it's always been shot down. Besides, for better or worse we'd end up losing [[User:Primefac/AFCStats#User rights splits|about 1/3 of our reviewers]] that way. Full protection is fine, us admins know what to look for :) [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:59, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{reply|Primefac}} Yo, who's OFM? On another page? — [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:maroon">'''fortuna'''</span>]][[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:navy">'''''velut luna'''''</span>]] 14:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::Curse you and your previous sig, {{u|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi}}. It's in my head now that you're "O Fortuna". [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:40, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::<small>"Sorry-!" said [[Wedge Antilles|Wedge]] ;) — [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:maroon">'''fortuna'''</span>]][[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:navy">'''''velut luna'''''</span>]] 14:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC)</small> |
|||
*So, reading the points, it's a ''yup'' for the indef full protection, a ''yup'' for moving requests to PERM, but a ''not really'' for '''combining''' AfC and NPP. In that case, would people be happy with, for the time being, pointing interested editors towards [[Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Articles for creation reviewer|this brand new PERM section]] (which is yet to go live)? -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 14:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:Well make it live so we can point people to it! [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:: {{re|Primefac}} Well it's live, but nothing points to it yet (bar PERM). Could do with a couple of eyes over it before we change all the wording here to point to it. You can find it at [[WP:PERM]] "Articles for creation reviewer" -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 14:24, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*{{ec}} But, if this decision is moved to Perm, does that mean the decision to grant permission might be made by people not associated with the AfC project? If so, that's a bad idea. Recent discussions about merging AfC and NPP have revealed widely different notions of the nature and purpose of AfC. It's better to have this permission granted only by people already experienced in AfC work. [[User:NewYorkActuary|NewYorkActuary]] ([[User talk:NewYorkActuary|talk]]) 14:28, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:That's a fairly good point. We ''do'' have a section above for requesting access, which has worked wonderfully so far. Might not need to go the full PERM route... [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:Agreed that's a good point - I'm all for centralising stuff though. The areas of PERM, although patrolled by admins in general, tend to have one or two who stick to certain areas. Sure, there's a chance requests will be approved/denied by admins outside of the AfC "circle", but in general I think those who have a vested interest in the project will be clerking that PERM page quite effectively. I'd also say I'm rather against walled gardens, so putting this permission request at PERM provides another level of transparency and contributes to the whole community thing -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 14:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*::Updated to say ''admins'', which is a point in and of itself - the only people who could approve access are those the community has trusted to be impartial -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 14:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
# I've manually tweaked the header at PERM to point here, rather than an empty talk page. |
|||
# Merging AfC and NPP is DOA. Best to focus on the particulars. |
|||
# I think it makes sense to take AfC to PERM; ''however'', it's not totally obvious that this is clearly an orthodox use of FULL, since it effectively changes longstanding community practice well beyond simply preventing non-constructive edits to a single page. I would feel better about an RfC for transparency's sake. I expect if it doesn't get bogged down in tangents on things other than a move to PERM it should pass fairly easily. [[User:Timothyjosephwood|<span style="color:#a56d3f;font-family:Impact;">Timothy</span><span style="color:#6f3800;font-family:Impact;">Joseph</span><span style="color:#422501;font-family:Impact;">Wood</span>]] 15:46, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Samoht27]]==== |
|||
{{U|NewYorkActuary}}, I think all that admins at PERM are required to do is the same as they do when considering any applications for any of the rights there. That would be checking on a users' edit history for indications that they understand the guidleines, their ability to communicate properly in English, the block log, a work pattern that demonstrate a need for the tool, andof ourse that the numerical conditions are met. As an example, I don't have a clue about AWB because despite the app being around for 12 years, it's developers refuse to port it to Mac, but I feel perfectly competent to accord a permission to use it. As {{U|Primefac }} says, we admins know what to look for. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 20:41, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Samoht27}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:Thank you for addressing my concerns. Although people with longer Wiki-memories than mine might be able to provide some counter-examples, my understanding is that AfC would be the only permission at PERM that has been the subject of vociferous calls for its elimination, with some of those calls coming from administrators. I agree with Timothy -- if this is to be done, it should be done pursuant to an RfC. Taking that route will allow a full discussion of the many questions and concerns that are likely to be associated with this change. [[User:NewYorkActuary|NewYorkActuary]] ([[User talk:NewYorkActuary|talk]]) 23:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I wish to provide help to AfC, as it serves an important role in making sure Wikipedia's information is kept up to its standards of quality, notability, and maintaining a neutral point of view. In other words, I want to help the encyclopedia be a useful collection of information, rather than an indiscriminate collection of information. [[User:Samoht27|Samoht27]] ([[User talk:Samoht27|talk]]) 17:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== |
====[[User:Nokia621]]==== |
||
* {{UserAFC|1=Nokia621}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
I wholeheartedly concur with shifting the permissions requests across to PERM. Having recently done all the work (except the .js and MediaWiki code) to set up a brand new user group, I would just like to make a couple of suggestions: |
|||
:Hi, first time applying here. I'd love to help out! [[User:Nokia621|Nokia621]] ([[User talk:Nokia621|talk]]) 19:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Kp2016rockin]]==== |
|||
1. '''Description at PERM''': to bring this in line with other descriptions - especially the non-official 3rd party AWB app - I propose te following description: |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Kp2016rockin}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I 've been inactive on Wikipedia for a while and have since returned. I was a participant [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants/Old Requests/2022#User:Kp2016rockin|here]] before being idle. With my return, I would like to help clear up the backlog more. [[User:Kp2016rockin|kpgamingz]] ([[User talk:Kp2016rockin|rant me]]) 00:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}} (as probationary per previous). [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Captbloodrock]]==== |
|||
''Articles for Creation Helper Script is a semi-automated system for reviewing draft articles by users who are either not able to create pages in mainspace or who prefer their drafts to be reviewed first. This is not a true user right, but access is granted by administrators. If approved, your account will be added to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants|AfC user list]]. Users are expected to have been registered for at least 90 days, made a minimum of 500 undeleted edits to articles, read and understood the reviewing instructions and have good knowledge of the guidelines and notability categories.'' |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Captbloodrock}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I've been a dedicated Wikipedian for several years now in terms of creating new articles and editing existing ones, and would like to expand my responsibilities by also being able to review new articles. [[User:Captbloodrock|Captbloodrock]] ([[User talk:Captbloodrock|talk]]) 18:02, 25 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 12:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== May == |
|||
- anyone not understanding the English or the tool should not be applying for it anyway. Admins already know what to do, but {{U|MusikAnimal}} will probably include it in his next admin newsletter. |
|||
===Inactive (May)=== |
|||
====[[User:Félix An]]==== |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Félix An}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I did some AfC reviewing in the past, and I would like to start reviewing again. Thanks! [[User:Félix An|Félix An]] ([[User talk:Félix An|talk]]) 06:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Mdann52]]==== |
|||
2. '''Optional''': As is done for most of the other requests, create a script that automates the inclusion on the list when an admin approves the request, and notifies the user with a message similar to this: |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Mdann52}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
{{collapsetop|notification }} |
|||
:Trying to return to (some!) activity again, and keen to start reviewing submissions again and helping those getting the up to standard. I've reviewed the relevant guidelines and hopefully know where to find stuff out to check if needed! [[User:Mdann52|Mdann52]] ([[User talk:Mdann52|talk]]) 10:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}, welcome back. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== New |
=== New (May) === |
||
====[[User:Matthew Wellington]]==== |
|||
[[File:AfC icon palceholder|right|AfC icon placeholder]] |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Matthew Wellington}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
<pre>{{safesubst:<noinclude />BASEPAGENAME}}</pre> Your account has been added to the group of ''Articles for Creation'' reviewers which gives you access to the Helper Script. Reviewing of submitted drafts is a function for helping new users to understand how to comply with article guidelines and/or notability and approving or declining new articles. Please be sure to read the tutorial at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions|Reviewing instructions]] again, and if you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation|'''AfC reviewer talk''']]. |
|||
:I would like to help out at AfC as recommended by Hey man im josh, while I had requested for perms here: [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions/New_page_reviewer#User:Matthew_Wellington]] [[User:Matthew Wellington|Matthew Wellington]] ([[User talk:Matthew Wellington|talk]]) 12:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*{{red|'''URGENT'''}}: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible. |
|||
::{{not done}}, sock. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 20:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*[[WP:BITE|Be nice to new users]] - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong, even if they used the Wizard. |
|||
*You will be asked by users to explain why their page is being rejected - be formal and polite in your approach to them, even if they are not. |
|||
*Remember that quality is quintessential to good reviewing. Take your time to review an article. |
|||
The AfC tool does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this tool, you may ask any administrator to remove your account from the list at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. <pre>~~~~</pre> |
|||
====[[User:MAINEiac4434]]==== |
|||
{{collapsebottom}} |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=MAINEiac4434}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I'd like to help the backlog, and improve Wikipedia! I have over 13,000 edits in over 13 years contributing, including a handful of page creations. If given access, I can start reviewing right away, as I've just familiarized myself with the AfC guidelines. [[User:MAINEiac4434|MAINEiac4434]] ([[User talk:MAINEiac4434|talk]]) 16:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Iwaqarhashmi]]==== |
|||
[[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 22:52, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Iwaqarhashmi}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I would be happy to assist with reviewing drafts and managing the backlog. I have thoroughly reviewed the provided criteria and instructions, and I believe I'm experienced enough to have this permission. [[User:Iwaqarhashmi|'''<span style="background:#FF0000;color:white;padding:5px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 lightgray">Waqar</span>''']][[User talk:Iwaqarhashmi|<span style="background:#0000FF;padding:2px;box-shadow:0 1px 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.2)">💬</span>]] 19:51, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== |
====[[User:Dclemens1971]]==== |
||
* {{UserAFC|1=Dclemens1971}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
*I'm not opposed to using [[WP:PERM]] for this akin to [[WP:AWB]] requests, however please don't start soliciting applications until there is consensus in the process. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 01:55, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I have extensive experience with new page creation, reliable source guidelines, notability policies and participation at AfD, and I'd love to help out with reducing the AfC backlog. Thanks! [[User:Dclemens1971|Dclemens1971]] ([[User talk:Dclemens1971|talk]]) 12:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Grabup]]==== |
|||
::{{U|Xaosflux}}, I strongly support the idea, based on the precednt of AWB, but the initiative is not mine and I had nothing to do with the creation of the PERM page. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 12:11, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Grabup}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:::Think it was {{ping|There'sNoTime}} running at full steam ahead. TNT, I reverted the PERM main header - but like I said above, only because it is still in proposal mode - if the new request process is good for whoever is going to use it, feel free to re-add. It may even help attract some people that want to do the work! — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 12:22, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:This tool is invaluable for editors like me who enjoy reviewing articles. Although I haven't been granted the New Page Reviewer right, I still want to contribute by helping to reduce the backlog. The tool was suggested to me by Admin Extraordinary Writ to my Request of New Pages Reviewers. This tool will greatly help me in reviewing articles that are ready and not ready for acceptance. [[User:Grabup|Grabup]] ([[User talk:Grabup|talk]]) 16:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{re|Xaosflux}} Ah thank you - after the initial "yes go for it"/"actually no wait" I managed to revert back ''most'' of my eager edits, but missed that one. Happy to just wait it out until whoever it is that needs to make their mind up ''does'' -- [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] <sup>([[User talk:There'sNoTime|to explain]])</sup> 13:05, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::I did [[Special:Diff/1221265378|suggest in passing]] that AfC made more sense than NPP, but I have no opinion on whether Grabup is ready for it at this time. (Cf. Spicy's comment [[Special:Diff/1221391571|here]].) [[User:Extraordinary Writ|Extraordinary Writ]] ([[User talk:Extraordinary Writ|talk]]) 03:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I hope this won't result in my request being denied. At least I might receive probation for a while. [[User:Grabup|Grabup]] ([[User talk:Grabup|talk]]) 04:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[User:Kudpung]]: |
|||
::::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:#In the notification message above, "Helper Script" may as well be Greek to someone who isn't familiar. The "under the hood term" should probably be linked or explained for the benefit of users who are qualified, but also presumably not seasoned AfC reviewers. |
|||
::::: Thanks for this. [[User:Grabup|Grabup]] ([[User talk:Grabup|talk]]) 07:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:# {{tq|This is not a true user right}} - While this surely makes sense to those of use who are familiar with the (again) "under the hood" difference, it is probably going to be confusing to many incoming reviewers. |
|||
:# {{tq|the guidelines and notability categories}} - This is awkward at best, and could probably better be simply {{tq|Wikipedia's [[WP:PG|policies and guidelines]], especially those related to [[WP:N|notability]].}} [[User:Timothyjosephwood|<span style="color:#a56d3f;font-family:Impact;">Timothy</span><span style="color:#6f3800;font-family:Impact;">Joseph</span><span style="color:#422501;font-family:Impact;">Wood</span>]] 12:58, 21 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Avs5221]]==== |
|||
::IMO, any 'incoming' reviewers who don't understand these terms shouldn't be reviewers. The text was taken from AWB. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 13:06, 21 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Avs5221}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:::It's not necessary to understand the difference between how a true "user right" is worked out in the software vs. the way that AfC reviewers are drawn from their presence on a particular list. All of the necessary knowledge is decidedly "over the hood", specifically notability and familiarity with common AfD outcomes. No programming knowledge necessary. [[User:Timothyjosephwood|<span style="color:#a56d3f;font-family:Impact;">Timothy</span><span style="color:#6f3800;font-family:Impact;">Joseph</span><span style="color:#422501;font-family:Impact;">Wood</span>]] 13:28, 21 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:Requesting reinstatement after an extended wikibreak. [[User:Avs5221|avs5221]]<sup>([[User talk:Avs5221|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Avs5221|contrib]])</sup> 04:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{u|Avs5221}}, you'll have to forgive me, but I'm not seeing any evidence you were formerly an AFC helper. When were you last active with the project? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 20:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::No problem, it's been several years at least. If I need to reestablish a track record, I understand. I chose to take a more passive role in editing as real life got busier, but my knowledge of Wikipedia rules and policies is still pretty [[User:Avs5221|avs5221]]<sup>([[User talk:Avs5221|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Avs5221|contrib]])</sup> 05:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{not done}} for now; you were last active in 2013, and the guidelines and policies have changed quite dramatically since then. A bit more activity, especially in areas such as XfD and CSD, will help to show that you're up-to-date on all the relevant criteria. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:41, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Will do, thank you! [[User:Avs5221|avs5221]]<sup>([[User talk:Avs5221|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Avs5221|contrib]])</sup> 16:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:The Sharpest Lives]]==== |
|||
==Removal of Sb2001== |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=The Sharpest Lives}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
{{archivetop|result=That's enough now, {{U|Sb2001}}. This is a project collaboration page, it's not about you. If anyone wants to continue this dialogue with you they'll do it on your talk page - or if you prefer, at [[WP:ANI]]. Back to work, folks (or school, as the case may be...) [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 15:50, 20 August 2017 (UTC)}} |
|||
:Requesting afc helper rights to help review articles. I think it would be a good use of my time. I have put 3 articles through the AfC process, so I generally understand how it is supposed to go. [[User:The Sharpest Lives|The Sharpest Lives]] 15:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I've removed Sb2001, in light of a number of reviews which have poor quality and/or unintelligible review comments. There are a number of other reviews which have been declined when they should properly have been approved or the work needed to remedy the issues was small/minor. I'm not too concerned about them being re-added fairly quickly, just as long as they understand the concerns and begin to address them. [[User:Nick|Nick]] ([[User talk:Nick|talk]]) 19:05, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:For a relatively succinct summary of why this happened, see [[User_talk:Sb2001#User:Wikisbaldivia.2Fsandbox|their talk page]] {{small|([[Special:PermaLink/796138726#User:Wikisbaldivia.2Fsandbox|permalink]])}} and [[Special:PermaLink/796136623#Strange_logic_behind_reverting_comments|two]] on [[Special:PermaLink/796136623#Draft:Luke_Tuchscherer|mine]]. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:08, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::How—exactly—are comments supposed to be addressed when there is no access allowed? –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Open Sans Extrabold;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Open Sans Light;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 19:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::You are welcome to continue working on drafts, and to comment on a draft all one needs to do is use {{t|AFC comment}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:12, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::I agree with the removal. The ideas which make perfect sense in one's head may need explication when communicated to someone else. More than once Sb2001 knew what they meant but no one else did, and when questioned, Sb2001 reiterated their belief in clarity rather than re-think the approach. AfC is meant to be a process where we guide new editors towards acceptability. Some amount of useful guidance is required. If you cannot provide that guidance then you shouldn't be reviewing. New editors get frustrated at our collective refusal, anyway. There's no reason to make it worse by being unclear. This was a good-faith error and I'd support Sb2001 re-applying in six months' time. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 19:20, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{tq|More than once Sb2001 knew what they meant but no one else did, and when questioned, Sb2001 reiterated their belief in clarity rather than re-think the approach.}} This fragment makes little sense. |
|||
:::::If removing editors from projects because of this sort of error is what you deem appropriate, I find it easy to understand why you have such a high backlog—nobody ''wants'' to be here. If they do, you remove them! |
|||
:::::Actually, my comments ''were'' helpful. You are not giving me any credit for the work I have done, and for which you should be grateful. |
|||
:::::It is all very well telling me to re-apply in six months, but with the hostility I of which I have been on the receiving end from people in the project, I think I may have to find somewhere else to go. Actually, maybe I will be ''forced'' off Wikipedia all together. Wherever I go, editors cannot resist laying into me. I cannot deal with that. Remember: I am a person. I come here to make a positive difference. I am sure that many other editors do, too. If you are too intolerant to accept what I am saying, and if you cannot understand ''very good'' English, you will find that the total number of editors in AfC comes rather close to nought. –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Open Sans Extrabold;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Open Sans Light;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 20:29, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*In hindsight, {{tq|This is not the place for this. See User:Redrose64 for more information. You will need to find a way of changing this to the US, rather than UK.}} could perhaps have done with being changed to {{tq|This is not the place for this. See User:Redrose64 for more information '''on arranging meet ups'''. You will need to find a way of changing this to the US, rather than UK.}} Would this have sufficed? –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Open Sans Extrabold;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Open Sans Light;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 22:44, 18 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:* No. You would need to explain that a meet-up page doesn't need to be processed through AfC as it's not an article, it can be added directly to the Wikipedia namespace as it doesn't need a review. You would then need to explain that the author might want to contact someone who is familiar with organising meet-ups and adding their pages to Wikipedia, someone like Redrose64. The way you're phrasing it, instructions for adding a page will be available at Redrose64's user page. You're still causing confusion with the "You will need to find a way of changing this to the US, rather than UK." as it still reads like you're wanting the author to change the meet-up location from being hosted in the US to being hosted in the UK, you need to be much clearer that you're telling the user that Redrose64 is UK based and that the author needs to be clear that they're organising a US meet-up, and perhaps that Redrose64 might not be able to help so much with a US meet-up. [[User:Nick|Nick]] ([[User talk:Nick|talk]]) 00:09, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*Concurring with the other admins, I have left an explanation on {{U|Sb2001}}'s talk page. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 00:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*I would like to note that I spent—as is evidenced by the time difference between my first and last edit (and the time before I first clicked 'save')—I spent the best part of an hour working on [[Draft:Alan Lucien Øyen|this draft]] (one of the two that had be removed from the AfC project) before leaving a comment. I now request that you go through ''every one'' of my AfC contributions, and present me with a list of my objections comments. It should not be too difficult, as I was only accepted on 14 August. What is evidenced from my contributions list is that I have spent many hours on this project, and received—apart from one exception, and slight appreciation from a submitter—no thanks in return. It really concerns me that, as administrators, you are not looking at the whole picture. Two administrators came to my talk page (later complimented by a third), and focussed on two comments. One of which on an article upon which I had spent a long time ('''far''' longer than plenty of AfC reviewers ...) 'fixing'. As I said at my talk page, if the process was easier, I would be registering a complaint. I imagine that I still will, should no resolution be found as a result of these discussions. Having two administrators coming to my page and pouncing is unacceptable, especially as there was nobody to support me. –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Open Sans Extrabold;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Open Sans Light;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 15:43, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{u|Sb2001}}, you continue to completely miss the point, and rather blow this whole thing out of proportion. First and foremost, none of us do this for the recognition. I've been doing this for three years and I've ''maybe'' received a half-dozen "thanks" posts on my talk page. However, I have received dozens of messages from other editors about what I've done, be it things I missed or suggestions on how to improve; I have never treated these as "hounding" or "harassment", but opportunities to re-evaluate the situation(s). |
|||
*:As you say, you started five days ago, and I would have been ''very'' surprised if you made zero mistakes right off the bat. As near as I can tell, the comments I left you in various places may have been slightly more on the blunt side, but they were all made in order for you to become a better reviewer. Nick and I were talking off-wiki before this kicked off, and I initially convinced him that you ''should'' stay on the project, if only to keep learning and get better. After he posted on your talk page things sorta spiralled out of control, because you made it about yourself and not about the project. |
|||
*:The AFC project ''does'' have some hot-headed individuals, but aside from some philosophical disagreements I don't think any of us feel that we [[WP:OWN|OWN]] the project ''or'' the drafts. Hell, sometimes we accept (or decline) drafts which we ''personally'' feel different about, but because the ''project'' has a set of guidelines and rules, we follow them. This is why MOS or formatting-based declines aren't acceptable, or why I accept some articles about professors even though I don't feel they meet our thresholds for notability. Our personal opinions may influence our interpretation of the guidelines, but it's the difference between choosing how large a tip to leave the server or just walking out without paying; none of us walk out without paying, but we all leave slightly different tips. |
|||
*:I think the above comment about re-applying in six months is a little lengthy, because we ''do'' need good reviewers. At this particular point in time, though, your attitude towards the rest of us would make for a very trying environment indeed. If you decide that you can't possibly deal with people like us, then I wish you luck in the future. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:56, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::I was not asking for recognition, rather that you consider my positive contributions in association with the ones with which you have a problem. I continue to object to two administrators coming to my talk page like that. It does not allow me to properly consider my responses, as I have to be fighting off two opponents at once. I made it about myself, did I? I was ''explaining'' the logic behind my comments. |
|||
:::I will object to the way in which the removal was imposed, ie in the middle of me offering responses. If this was outside of Wikipedia, that would be unacceptable. Administrators are like policemen; if an officer chose to charge someone without offering them a proper chance to defend themselves, they would be on the receiving end of an anti-corruption investigation. Nick's conduct was unacceptable in this manner, so I have decided that I ''shall'' make a complaint. Please direct me to the relevant place. –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Open Sans Extrabold;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Open Sans Light;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 17:25, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{u|Sb2001}}, I'll tell you where to go, but just know that I find it ''highly'' unlikely anything will come of it (mainly because the case involves three senior AFC members). Granted, I doubt it will [[WP:BOOMERANG|BOOMERANG]] back on you, since you haven't really done anything "bad", but you still might get a trout. I suggest just leaving well enough alone, but reporting users generally takes place at [[WP:ANI]]. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 18:52, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Because you are 'senior' members, you are able to remove someone from the project without giving them a proper chance to respond to what you are saying? Why does WP not have an anti-corruption area? –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Impact;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 18:59, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::::{{u|Sb2001}}, you're probably right in that Nick should have waited another ten minutes for you to fully convince us that you weren't going to listen to reasonable requests to change your behaviour. However, it's now been 24 hours since it happened and you have yet to convince me (who despite what you may believe is trying to help) or anyone else that it was (overall) the wrong move. There are some troubling things in your attitude that don't mesh well with a learner-centred environment like AFC. |
|||
::::::So yes, you might have been removed a little sooner than what is ideal (and for that I apologise), but your replies here haven't really shown that it wouldn't have happened eventually. As I mentioned before, [[WP:ANI]] is where grievances are filed against other users when admin intervention may be required, but this is very far from of those situations, and I find it unlikely that anything will come of it. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 19:09, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: |
|||
{{od}} |
|||
When I have time, I will present you with a fully-justified summary as to why the wrong decision was made. Possibly by email, as then I do not risk being hounded, excuse my language. –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Impact;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 20:01, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:That's fine. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 20:04, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::::::{{u|Sb2001}}, As a disinterested bystander may I make a few points, |
|||
::::::*AfC is NOT about you, it's about the level of competence you show in dealing with new contributors. If you're going to use it as a platform to advance your own MOS then you shouldn't be active in AfC. |
|||
::::::*{{green|''"able to remove someone from the project"''}} - you're still here. Your account isn't blocked. |
|||
::::::*{{green|''"Why does WP not have an anti-corruption area?"''}} - are you ''seriously'' suggesting that someone is being paid to give you a hard time? |
|||
::::::*Yes, your english is good, just not quite as good as you think it is. Your efforts to enforce your preferences as outlined on your userpage are misplaced - especially at AfC. |
|||
::::::*Drop the hyperbole, step back from the dispute, and take some time to think rationally about what's going on, and to think about what people have said (using a [[WP:AGF]] interpretation, not a thin-skinned expectation of attack). If you rush to [[WP:ANI]] it '''will''' rebound on you. You have it in you to be a valuable contributor, but not if you refuse to see the project is a collaboration. [[User:Cabayi|Cabayi]] ([[User talk:Cabayi|talk]]) 19:19, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: |
|||
{{od}} |
|||
*{{tq|AfC is NOT about you, it's about the level of competence you show in dealing with new contributors. If you're going to use it as a platform to advance your own MOS then you shouldn't be active in AfC.}} I am not using it to enforce stylistic preferences; look through my AfC contributions. I do not really know from where you got this idea. |
|||
*{{tq|your english is good, just not quite as good as you think it is. Your efforts to enforce your preferences as outlined on your userpage are misplaced - especially at AfC.}} For one, how do you know how good ''I think'' my English (NB, capital letter) is? And for another, the second half is totally irrelevant. They are valid stylistic concerns on my user page. I do not use AfC for this purpose, anyway. Evidence? Anyway, my English is pretty good: I would show you my grades, but they are on pieces of paper containing my name. |
|||
*{{tq|are you ''seriously'' suggesting that someone is being paid to give you a hard time?}} Do you ''seriously'' not know what corruption is? I shall explain: corruption is were someone in a position of power misuses it. For example, someone may fail to reach a decision ''on the balance of evidence'', instead being swayed towards one side for no apparent reason—or, for their own benefit. There need be no exchange of money. –[[User:Sb2001|<span style="font-family:Impact;font-size:10.5pt;color:#800080">Sb2001</span>]] [[User talk:Sb2001|<sup><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:8pt;color:#008000">talk page</span></sup>]] 20:01, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
{{archivebottom}} |
|||
====[[User:MKsLifeInANutshell]]==== |
|||
== Inactive == |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=MKsLifeInANutshell}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I would love to assist in reviewing articles. I had talked to a few reviewers such as KylieTastic before applying, who said I am eligible and can go ahead and apply. I have good enough AfD experience. I have created a lot of articles through AfC. I would also love to help with managing the backlog.<br>I had submitted an application earlier, but at the time I didn't meet the requirements, but now I believe I am worth having this permission. [[User:MKsLifeInANutshell|MKsLifeInANutshell]] ([[User talk:MKsLifeInANutshell|talk]]) 11:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:TheNuggeteer]]==== |
|||
Not a big deal but I'm not sure how I got on the moved to the inactive list. I am currently doing several reviews a week so not inactive. ~[[User:Kvng|Kvng]] ([[User talk:Kvng|talk]]) 00:30, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=TheNuggeteer}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:{{u|Kvng}}, no idea (I probably did it), but you're back on the active list now. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 02:19, 19 August 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:I applied because I have an account which is: |
|||
*90 days old (my account age is more than 11 months) |
|||
*at least 500 undeleted edits (according to XTools I have 762 Live edits) |
|||
*thoroughly read the reading instructions |
|||
(I read the reviewing instructions thoroughly, the notability guidelines, and the AFD guidelines) |
|||
*a willingness and ability to respond in a timely manner to questions about their reviews. (I have time on my hands, and I can respond to questions) [[User:TheNuggeteer|TheNuggeteer]] ([[User talk:TheNuggeteer|talk]]) 13:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Jlwoodwa]]==== |
|||
== RfC: Full protection == |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Jlwoodwa}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
:I've been on Wikipedia for a year and made 30k undeleted edits. As I understand the reviewing instructions, AfC is preemptive, conservative AfD: rejecting articles that would ''very likely'', and for ''good reason'', be deleted at AfD. (And outside of CSD material, notability is the main such reason.) I've spent some time participating in/reading deletion discussions, as well as reviewing/applying deletion and notability policy, and I think I have a decent grasp of these.{{pb}}I want to participate because it's discouraging for a new editor to have their draft sit in pending for months. Keeping the AfC process running smoothly and correctly isn't just about the articles themselves, it's also about keeping Wikipedia welcoming to newcomers without sacrificing encyclopedic standards. [[User:Jlwoodwa|jlwoodwa]] ([[User talk:Jlwoodwa|talk]]) 05:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Vlest]]==== |
|||
{{rfc|proj|tech|rfcid=29023A0}} |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Vlest}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
Should [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants]] remain fully protected? [[User:There'sNoTime|There'sNoTime]] decided to do this, but in order to truly determine consensus, we need an RfC. '''[[User:GeoffreyT2000|GeoffreyT2000]]''' <sup>([[User talk:GeoffreyT2000|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/GeoffreyT2000|contribs]])</sup> 03:58, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:Reason for requesting afc helper script rights [[User:Vlest|Vlest]] ([[User talk:Vlest|talk]]) 22:22, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{not done}}. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 11:43, 16 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:Twinkle1990]]==== |
|||
*'''Support''' Until the role of the participants list is overtaken by a new userright handed out at PERM, the list has to remain protected. As a procedural matter, I object to this RfC. The status of this list should be determined by WikiProject AfC, not the larger community. <span class="nowrap" style="font-family:copperplate gothic light;">[[User:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">Chris Troutman</span>]] ([[User talk:Chris troutman|<span style="color:#345">talk</span>]])</span> 04:01, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=Twinkle1990}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
*'''Support''' to many bad actors adding themselves but we don't need a Perm the current system is fine. Also I agree with Chris troutman that this is a local issue not a global discussion. [[User:Legacypac|Legacypac]] ([[User talk:Legacypac|talk]]) 04:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi. Please evaluate my probationary period and let me know if I'm eligible to get in as full time or not. [[User:Twinkle1990|Twinkle1990]] ([[User talk:Twinkle1990|talk]]) 16:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' per Primefac, I definitely agree that there were too many less experienced editors adding themselves to the system. It thankfully was never widely abused to allow bogus reviewers to usher in promotional/COI content unchecked but that's a potential method of abuse we really do need to be wary of, hence doubling supporting the retention of full protection. I'm not overly bothered when it comes to the use of a user-right or retention of this page for managing access. I'm also happy to add and remove names and help with the administrative side of things, just ping if you need my help. [[User:Nick|Nick]] ([[User talk:Nick|talk]]) 09:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
::I will do it when I do it. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' - As I commented to the effect somewhere above, I think this will easily pass, but I do think that an RfC is the way to go for the sake of propriety. Thanks for taking the time to open one [[User:GeoffreyT2000|GeoffreyT2000]]. [[User:GreenMeansGo|<span style="font-family:Impact"><span style="color:#07CB4B">G</span><span style="color:#449351">M</span><span style="color:#35683d">G</span></span>]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|<sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk</sup>]] 10:54, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' - Over the last 3 years it's been protected more than unprotected. The FP seems to be doing its job and does not appear to be deterring people of the right experience. There have actually been quite a few instances of users and socks deliberately trying to list themselves for dishonest purposes. I think it should remain protected now as a permanent feature, but there's probably no real rush to have applications processed at PERM. [[User:Kudpung|Kudpung กุดผึ้ง]] ([[User talk:Kudpung|talk]]) 11:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''': it's as powerful a tool as new page reviewer rights so admins should be the ones who determine candidates' suitability, especially with the increasing trend of underhand paid editing. PERM would be a good place to have it but as {{u|Kudpung}} suggests, there's no rush. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. '''<span style="font-family: Courier">[[User:DrStrauss|<span style="color: blue">Dr</span><span style="color: darkblue">Strauss</span>]] [[User talk:DrStrauss|<span style="color: purple">talk</span>]]</span>''' 22:13, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' - Same thing has existed for years at [[WP:AWB/CP]]. – [[User:Nihlus|Nihlus]] ([[User talk:Nihlus|talk]]) 22:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 03:54, 30 September 2017 (UTC) |
|||
====[[User:TheGoldenArmor375]]==== |
|||
== A few thoughts == |
|||
* {{UserAFC|1=TheGoldenArmor375}}<!--WP:AFC/P/R--> |
|||
{{moved to|[[WT:AFC]] [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:33, 1 October 2017 (UTC)}} |
|||
:Reason for requesting afc helper script rights, and I have understood all guidelines to be followed for the sports and esports community notability, and I have experience in editing stub articles/incomplete articles too, and I would love to help reviewing pending submitted esports and sports articles in the Wikipedia community, to help reduce AfC backlogs. Thank you! [[User:TheGoldenArmor375|TheGoldenArmor375]] ([[User talk:TheGoldenArmor375|talk]]) 04:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{WP:AFCP/P}} [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 07:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 07:18, 20 May 2024
This page is for requesting access to the AFC Helper script. If you wish to discuss this list, its requirements, or AFCH in general, do so at the main talk page.
Requests
- All archived requests older than one month can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants/Old Requests.
- We generally do not notify users of acceptances, so check back often.
- Non-admins should refrain from closing reviews.
April
NPR (April)
User:GraziePrego
- GraziePrego (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Just noticed I'm not on the list of reviewers, but I've been a reviewer with AFCH tool usage for a while now :) Can I be added to the list please? GraziePrego (talk) 04:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC) GraziePrego (talk) 04:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Those with the NPR permission are given access to AFCH automatically, and don't need to be on the list. LittlePuppers (talk) 03:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Inactive (April)
User:Gryllida
- Gryllida (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Was helping previously, with access having expired due to inactivity. Keen to resume activity now. Please re-add me to participants list. Thanks Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 22:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Sahaib
- Sahaib (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I used to contribute to WP:AFD and would like to review more articles. I am less busy nowadays as well, former name was User:Sahaib3005. Sahaib (talk) 07:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
User:-noah-
- Hi! I used to be a probationary reviewer a while ago but then I stopped being active and my permissions expired. Thanks! Noah 💬 00:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Name change (April)
User:Xoak
Xoak (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
Was renamed a bit ago from Xkalponik to Xoak.X (talk) 11:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
New (Apr)
User:Idunnox3
- Idunnox3 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Hi! I'd like to contribute to WP:AfC project and now I have enough time for it. I've read the rules, and I have some WP:AFD experience to start with. Idunnox3 (talk) 12:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Shonyx
- Shonyx (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I have an experience with WP:AFD and reverting articles. As a participator of WikiProject Articles for creation, I have now the experience of:
- reject/decline the draft if the draft has low on citations and no notable support between independent sources and the draft itself.
- approve of these drafts and move them to article space if theres a connection between independent sources, affiliated sources and the draft must have a inline citations. If does the article had 1550 letters, then I slapped (means 'nominate deletion of the article) and copyright violation.
- declining of the draft submitted because breaks the WP:GNG, WP:BIO, etc.
I have more than 500 edits and I have low on undeleted edits, see my contributions Shonyx 06:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- and one last thing I mentioned that my account is more than 90 days Shonyx 06:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
User:AWN08
- AWN08 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I would like to review AfC primarily on British non-profit organisations, international relations, militaries and politics. AWN08 (talk) 22:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
User:NegativeMP1
- NegativeMP1 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Requesting AfC reviewer to help out in more general areas of Wikipedia, which includes decreasing the backlog. My account is about a year old, and while I've created very few articles overall (25~), I would say I have pretty good comprehension of the notability guidelines. I have plenty of experience in AfD, having participated in it nearly as long as I've been on Wikipedia with a 62% success rate (+ more if you count merges). I also have a general idea of other notability guidelines, but I only say "general idea" because I don't write articles for, say, sports players. I would respond to questions quickly as I am very active on-wiki. λ NegativeMP1 04:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC) λ NegativeMP1 04:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Xkalponik
- Xkalponik (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I've been a longtime editor with 3.5k+ edits, created (out of the 4 deleted articles 3 were self-delete) and contributed to a fair number of articles, having GA, and passed DYKs. I've participated in various WikiProjects, most notably WIR and WikiProject:Fungi. I've experience with AFDs and noticeboard discussions. For quite some time now, I'm almost regular to the wiki and if able, I hope to respond promptly to questions about my reviews. I have a good grasp of the policies and guidelines mentioned in the reviewing instructions, especially the various notability guidelines.
I'd like to help the AFC backlogs, especially with biological nomenclature articles, as I'm more often than not somewhat familiar with and passionate about these fields. X (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC) X (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Probation, which will be evaluated in 3-6 months. Being on probation only means that you can be removed from the list for any reason without prior discussion. Primefac (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Staraction
- Staraction (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I want to be able to help with the AfC backlog! I've been working with creating new articles through AfC for a while now, so I have a good idea of the requirements, especially WP:NOTABILITY (which I've learned through experience). I believe I meet the minimum requirements and would like to help more. Thanks for considering! Staraction (talk | contribs) 22:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Futuristicediting
- Futuristicediting (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- To start a new beginning Futuristicediting (talk) 11:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Not done. You were just blocked from moving pages, which will make it impossible to be a reviewer. Additionally, the recent series of rapid, useless edits to your talk page does not give me any confidence. If you continue editing disruptively, you will be blocked sitewide. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 15:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
User:SafariScribe
- SafariScribe (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Hi, I'm requesting the AFC reviewing right after reading more of the reviewing instructions to volunteer in WP:AFC. Furthermore, I have participated actively in AFD, and from my contibs, helped out in certain tasks of the encyclopedia. I have also helped in some draft reviewing, so it's a good way of helping the backlog (since it do rise each time I look at it). Thanks for the consideration.— Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 22:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Shadow311
User:CanonNi
- Hello. I would like to request access to the AfC Helper Script to help review new articles (and lower the backlog). I have over 4500 edits, with over 1500 in the mainspace, and have participated in the deletion process through CSD and AfD (though I've only started logging CSD recently). I have also created several articles and have helped others create theirs. I have thoroughly read the reviewing instructions and will start reviewing carefully right away, if access is given. Thank you for considering my request!
'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''(talk|contribs) 23:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Done. Primefac (talk) 11:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much!
'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''(talk|contribs) 11:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much!
User:HistoryTheorist
- HistoryTheorist (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I would like to help move promising drafts into the mainspace and return the cruddier drafts back to their authors. I don't plan on using the tools much as writing/reviewing GAs is where my interests are at, though. As a content creator, I have created a few articles myself and have light AfD experience. I also got a crash course on notability from NPP school (on which I feel pretty confident about now) but never finished as my teacher went inactive. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Samoht27
- Samoht27 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I wish to provide help to AfC, as it serves an important role in making sure Wikipedia's information is kept up to its standards of quality, notability, and maintaining a neutral point of view. In other words, I want to help the encyclopedia be a useful collection of information, rather than an indiscriminate collection of information. Samoht27 (talk) 17:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Nokia621
- Nokia621 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
User:Kp2016rockin
- Kp2016rockin (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I 've been inactive on Wikipedia for a while and have since returned. I was a participant here before being idle. With my return, I would like to help clear up the backlog more. kpgamingz (rant me) 00:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
User:Captbloodrock
- Captbloodrock (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I've been a dedicated Wikipedian for several years now in terms of creating new articles and editing existing ones, and would like to expand my responsibilities by also being able to review new articles. Captbloodrock (talk) 18:02, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
May
Inactive (May)
User:Félix An
- Félix An (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I did some AfC reviewing in the past, and I would like to start reviewing again. Thanks! Félix An (talk) 06:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Mdann52
- Trying to return to (some!) activity again, and keen to start reviewing submissions again and helping those getting the up to standard. I've reviewed the relevant guidelines and hopefully know where to find stuff out to check if needed! Mdann52 (talk) 10:55, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
New (May)
User:Matthew Wellington
- Matthew Wellington (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I would like to help out at AfC as recommended by Hey man im josh, while I had requested for perms here: [[1]] Matthew Wellington (talk) 12:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
User:MAINEiac4434
- MAINEiac4434 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I'd like to help the backlog, and improve Wikipedia! I have over 13,000 edits in over 13 years contributing, including a handful of page creations. If given access, I can start reviewing right away, as I've just familiarized myself with the AfC guidelines. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 16:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Iwaqarhashmi
- Iwaqarhashmi (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I would be happy to assist with reviewing drafts and managing the backlog. I have thoroughly reviewed the provided criteria and instructions, and I believe I'm experienced enough to have this permission. Waqar💬 19:51, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Dclemens1971
- Dclemens1971 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I have extensive experience with new page creation, reliable source guidelines, notability policies and participation at AfD, and I'd love to help out with reducing the AfC backlog. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Grabup
- This tool is invaluable for editors like me who enjoy reviewing articles. Although I haven't been granted the New Page Reviewer right, I still want to contribute by helping to reduce the backlog. The tool was suggested to me by Admin Extraordinary Writ to my Request of New Pages Reviewers. This tool will greatly help me in reviewing articles that are ready and not ready for acceptance. Grabup (talk) 16:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I did suggest in passing that AfC made more sense than NPP, but I have no opinion on whether Grabup is ready for it at this time. (Cf. Spicy's comment here.) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Avs5221
- Requesting reinstatement after an extended wikibreak. avs5221(talk|contrib) 04:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Avs5221, you'll have to forgive me, but I'm not seeing any evidence you were formerly an AFC helper. When were you last active with the project? Primefac (talk) 20:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, it's been several years at least. If I need to reestablish a track record, I understand. I chose to take a more passive role in editing as real life got busier, but my knowledge of Wikipedia rules and policies is still pretty avs5221(talk|contrib) 05:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Avs5221, you'll have to forgive me, but I'm not seeing any evidence you were formerly an AFC helper. When were you last active with the project? Primefac (talk) 20:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
User:The Sharpest Lives
- The Sharpest Lives (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Requesting afc helper rights to help review articles. I think it would be a good use of my time. I have put 3 articles through the AfC process, so I generally understand how it is supposed to go. The Sharpest Lives 15:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
User:MKsLifeInANutshell
- MKsLifeInANutshell (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I would love to assist in reviewing articles. I had talked to a few reviewers such as KylieTastic before applying, who said I am eligible and can go ahead and apply. I have good enough AfD experience. I have created a lot of articles through AfC. I would also love to help with managing the backlog.
I had submitted an application earlier, but at the time I didn't meet the requirements, but now I believe I am worth having this permission. MKsLifeInANutshell (talk) 11:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
User:TheNuggeteer
- TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- I applied because I have an account which is:
- 90 days old (my account age is more than 11 months)
- at least 500 undeleted edits (according to XTools I have 762 Live edits)
- thoroughly read the reading instructions
(I read the reviewing instructions thoroughly, the notability guidelines, and the AFD guidelines)
- a willingness and ability to respond in a timely manner to questions about their reviews. (I have time on my hands, and I can respond to questions) TheNuggeteer (talk) 13:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Jlwoodwa
- I've been on Wikipedia for a year and made 30k undeleted edits. As I understand the reviewing instructions, AfC is preemptive, conservative AfD: rejecting articles that would very likely, and for good reason, be deleted at AfD. (And outside of CSD material, notability is the main such reason.) I've spent some time participating in/reading deletion discussions, as well as reviewing/applying deletion and notability policy, and I think I have a decent grasp of these.I want to participate because it's discouraging for a new editor to have their draft sit in pending for months. Keeping the AfC process running smoothly and correctly isn't just about the articles themselves, it's also about keeping Wikipedia welcoming to newcomers without sacrificing encyclopedic standards. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
User:Vlest
- Vlest (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
User:Twinkle1990
- Twinkle1990 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Hi. Please evaluate my probationary period and let me know if I'm eligible to get in as full time or not. Twinkle1990 (talk) 16:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
User:TheGoldenArmor375
- TheGoldenArmor375 (talk · contribs · xtools · pages created · logs (block • csd • prod) · afd)
- Reason for requesting afc helper script rights, and I have understood all guidelines to be followed for the sports and esports community notability, and I have experience in editing stub articles/incomplete articles too, and I would love to help reviewing pending submitted esports and sports articles in the Wikipedia community, to help reduce AfC backlogs. Thank you! TheGoldenArmor375 (talk) 04:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)