Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewer help

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page Talk page
Showcase Assessment Participants Reviewing instructions Help desk Backlog drives
Welcome to the Wikipedia Articles for Creation Reviewer Help page
WPAFC talk pages: Main - AFC Helper script - Reviewer help
AfC submissions
Very high backlog
1879 pending submissions
Purge to update

  • This page is for reviewers to ask for a second opinion about specific AfC reviews. Are you in the right place?
Skip to the bottom
WikiProject Articles for creation (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This redirect is used for the administration of the Articles for Creation or Files for Upload processes and is therefore within the scope of WikiProject Articles for Creation. Please direct any queries to the discussion page. WikiProject icon
 Project  This redirect does not require a rating on the quality scale.

User Space to Main Space -> User name is being included in the scripted move[edit]

Help on an article I just rejected[edit]

Hi! Just came back to help out on this backlog, after taking a hiatus for several months. I just declined an article: Draft:Mark Labberton. It was the first time I declined an article for copyright violations. I used Earwig's copyvio detector, and it came up 66.5% positive. When I looked at the samples, it indeed looked like large sections had been cut and paste. Can someone review what I did and make sure I did it correctly and let me know? Thanks, I appreciate the direction. Onel5969 (talk) 23:03, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Draft:V. R. Vidyarthi[edit]

This draft looks promising. Unfortunately all of the refs are offline and I don't have access. I've done some online searches to try and assess credibility and I've found nothing really. Any suggestions? ~KvnG 15:28, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Confusing statement in decline template[edit]

I have just declined User:Sirerick5255/sandbox as blank. The decline template has a false misleading statement at the bottom that the page has been resubmitted to be reviewed again. I have been absent here over the last few months so I may have missed out on some recent updates to decline templates. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

A WP:PURGE will fix that. If you notice it happening on a regular basis, let me know so I can investigate. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Both "not submitted" and "submitted"[edit]

I'm new to this, and I've run into some articles that are both "not submitted for review" (gray box) and "review waiting" (yellow-ish box). e.g. [1]. Should I go ahead and review these? Should I pay attention to the gray box? Thanks, LaMona (talk) 21:13, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you should review those. I deployed a fix to keep that from happening in most cases a while ago, but it looks like there are some edge cases where it still happens. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:29, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Figured it was a bug; will dutifully ignore. LaMona (talk) 16:27, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Completely Stumped by Draft:Hashtag WhyIStayed/WhyILeft[edit]

First I thought it was WP:NOT. Then a neologism. Then I thought that the notability was temporary. Now I'm completely stumped. Can someone take a look at it? It's been at AfC for a while. (I'm trying to get through very old submissions.) Thanks, Julie JSFarman (talk) 00:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Julie, it seems to me that this article is more about the fallout from the Rice controversy than about the hashtag. I would merge/redirect it to the Domestic violence page, adding anything there that isn't already included, and with a mention on the Ray Rice page - something like: discussion of this on Twitter led to the first use of the #whyIstayed hash tag. The tag itself, IMO, doesn't merit a page. LaMona (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
There is significant coverage in multiple reliable sources (WP:GOLDEN RULE) so it is a notable topic and eligible for inclusion in the encyclopedia. It would be a welcome addition with a potential incoming wikilink from Hashtag. If someone thinks that the material is better merged as suggested by LaMona, for instance, that can always be discussed and executed once the submission is in mainspace. Submissions should only be rejected with mergeto reason if they do not meet requirements for a stand-alone article. ~KvnG 00:29, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you for the input. I just did an edit and accepted the article based on the coverage.JSFarman (talk) 01:26, 27 January 2015 (UTC)