BlueMoonset (talk | contribs) →Nomination topics and subtopics: fixing Media and drama "other" topic, which is "Media and drama" |
TonyTheTiger (talk | contribs) →How to review an article: this one is pretty good |
||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
# Before reading the article in detail, check it for [[Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles#First things to look for|immediate problems]]. If you believe a detailed review is premature, add your reasons to the review page and use the '''[[#Fail|fail]]''' process; otherwise continue with the next steps. |
# Before reading the article in detail, check it for [[Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles#First things to look for|immediate problems]]. If you believe a detailed review is premature, add your reasons to the review page and use the '''[[#Fail|fail]]''' process; otherwise continue with the next steps. |
||
# Read the whole article, and decide whether it should '''[[#Pass|pass]]''' or '''[[#Fail|fail]]''' based on the [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria|Good article criteria]]. You can also put the article "'''[[#On hold|on hold]]'''" or ask for a '''[[#Second opinion|second opinion]]'''. The review process itself should take, at most, two weeks. |
# Read the whole article, and decide whether it should '''[[#Pass|pass]]''' or '''[[#Fail|fail]]''' based on the [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria|Good article criteria]]. You can also put the article "'''[[#On hold|on hold]]'''" or ask for a '''[[#Second opinion|second opinion]]'''. The review process itself should take, at most, two weeks. |
||
# Provide a detailed review of the article on the review page. If you wish, you can organize your critique using checklists such as {{tls|FGAN}}, {{tls|GAList}}, {{tls|GAList2}}, {{tls|GATable}}, {{tls|GABox}} or {{tls|GAHybrid}}, and inform the nominator of your actions using {{tls|GANotice}} or {{tls|GANotice2}}. |
# Provide a detailed review of the article on the review page. If you wish, you can organize your critique using checklists such as {{tls|FGAN}}, {{tls|GAList}}, {{tls|GAList2}}, {{tls|GATable}}, {{tls|GABox}}, {{tls|GAProgress}} or {{tls|GAHybrid}}, and inform the nominator of your actions using {{tls|GANotice}} or {{tls|GANotice2}}. |
||
:: Where the article meets the [[WP:WIAGA|Good article criteria]], you might like to consider making suggestions for further improvements if appropriate. Where it does not meet the Good article criteria, explain which criteria are not met, and detail the problems to help other editors improve the article. If a problem is easy to resolve, you are encouraged (but not required) to [[WP:Be bold|be bold]] and fix it yourself. |
:: Where the article meets the [[WP:WIAGA|Good article criteria]], you might like to consider making suggestions for further improvements if appropriate. Where it does not meet the Good article criteria, explain which criteria are not met, and detail the problems to help other editors improve the article. If a problem is easy to resolve, you are encouraged (but not required) to [[WP:Be bold|be bold]] and fix it yourself. |
||
Revision as of 04:33, 19 November 2012
Good article nominations![]() Wikipedia:Good articles is a list of articles that meet a core set of editorial standards but are not featured article quality. The Good article nominations page provides a list of articles which have been nominated for Good article status, as well as instructions for nominators and reviewers. Articles can be nominated by anyone, and reviewed by any registered user who has not contributed significantly to the article. There are currently 604 nominations listed and 510 waiting to be reviewed. |
How to nominate an articleIf you believe an article meets the Good article criteria, you may nominate it in the following way (please read the guide for nominating good articles for further advice):
If you've completed these two steps successfully, a bot will post your nomination on this page within 20 minutes. It may take several weeks for your nomination to be reviewed, as there are usually many open nominations. Do not start the review page yourself as this may lead other reviewers to believe that your nomination is already under review. If you are a registered user, you are encouraged to help by reviewing other articles. To leave a note related to the review, edit the To withdraw a nomination before the review has begun, remove the {{GA nominee}} from the article talk page. If you wish to withdraw a nomination after the review has begun, then the nomination must be closed using the fail process to record the outcome of the review. |
Nomination topics and subtopics
|
How to review an articleWhen choosing an article to review, keep in mind:
Review carefully—see Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles for more advice or you can ask questions at the Good article help desk. |
Pass![]() If you feel the article meets the Good article criteria:
|
Fail![]() If you feel the article does not meet the Good article criteria:
|
On hold![]() You may put an article "On Hold" for a period of time, generally one week:
|
Second opinion![]() If you are unsure whether an article meets the Good article criteria, you may ask another reviewer or subject expert for a second opinion:
|
|