Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches
Dispatches: Reviewing featured articles
- or "Give Some to Get Some" By Karanacs and SandyGeorgia, April 7 2008
Featured articles (FA) show off our best work to the world and serve as a powerful model for all of Wikipedia's articles. The featured article process (FAC) is vital to setting and maintaining our standards of verification, writing and formatting. To complement the FA nominations/archiving process, the featured article review process (FAR) enables the review and updating of articles that already have the gold star. Both FAC and FAR pages are dynamic places where you'll meet and work with talented Wikipedia editors.
Some nominations are not promoted, not because editors opposed the nomination, but because not enough reviewers look at some topics, while other topics attract more reviews. To be assured of a large number of reviewers on obscure topics, featured article writer Yomangani offered this tongue-in-cheek advice for an editor struggling to get an article about a historic expedition noticed and reviewed:
He obviously needs to add in the info about the video game featuring a dinosaur which is based on The Simpsons episode in which Gwen Stefani sings about Ethelred the Unready and Mary Wollstonecraft failing to join the expedition after they were blown away in a hurricane during the battle of Pearl Harbor. That might attract some reviewers.[1]
The solution to this problem? More reviewers! All Wikipedians are welcome to review articles at FAC and FAR, but reviews well grounded in an understanding of featured article standards are most helpful. Editors who have submitted articles to FAC are encouraged to return the favor and review other articles; articles can't be promoted without review, and one way to get more reviews is for frequent nominators to give more reviews. We've put together a list of frequently asked questions:
Why should I review featured article candidates?
- Have a voice in determining and applying Wikipedia's standards of excellence to our very best work
- Gather good karma (if you review someone's article, they may one day review one of yours)
- Read really interesting, well written and well researched articles that you might not otherwise notice
- Earn potential barnstars from grateful nominators
- Improve your own writing skills and knowledge of FA standards to prepare for submitting a future FAC
What do I need to know to review an article?
Featured articles are reviewed against the featured article criteria; articles are judged on whether they are well-written, comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral, and stable; comply with Wikipedia's Manual of Style (MoS); have images where appropriate with acceptable copyright status; and are of appropriate length.
How do I know if an article meets the critera?
Some of the criteria may seem subjective to new reviewers; it's helpful to read some recently promoted and not promoted candidate pages and articles to see how the criteria were applied, and then watch the FAC and FAR pages for a time to see how other reviewers apply the standards. Comments from editors who may not yet understand the standards can be still be helpful and are welcome.
There are way too many articles at FAC and FAR; I don't have time to read all those!
Relax, you don't have to review all the articles at FAC or FAR. Some people review only one article; others are FAC or FAR "regulars" and review several dozen each month. At any given moment a wide variety of topics are represented at FAC and FAR; you might choose to review only articles about a topic that particularly interests you, like cricket or penguins, or you might choose to specialize in reviewing articles for a specific criterion, like MOS compliance, reliable sources or compelling prose.
I'm never going to master all the criteria; can I still help?
Some reviewers prefer to immerse themselves in evaluating all aspects of articles in areas they are familiar with, while others may specialize in a subset of the featured article criteria. They might check image copyright tags, validate that all external links lead to an operational web page, evaluate the article's sources to see if they are reliable, or make sure that the references are formatted properly. Others may only review topics they are familiar with and check for comprehensiveness. A few evaluate only prose, and others ensure that articles comply with MoS. (The bravest reviewers even enforce the guidelines on dashes.)
Okay, I read one of the nominated articles. Now what?
At FAC, a reviewer is expected to leave comments, prefaced by Oppose, Support, or Comments. New reviewers are encouraged to leave only Comments until they are sure that they understand the criteria. Some reviewers enter Fixes needed and return in a few days to see if the issues were addressed, and may then switch to Oppose or Support.
All comments and opposes should be actionable, giving the nominator enough information to understand and fix the issues you have outlined. For example, Oppose, too short, is not an actionable oppose, but if you demonstrate the article is not comprehensive, that is actionable. Give examples, where appropriate, and link to the appropriate WP guideline or policy. For example, if you find that an article's prose is not compelling and brilliant, it's not necessary to analyze the entire article, rather to give enough examples to demonstrate that additional copyedit attention is needed. Any comments that are not actionable will not be considered by the FA director or his delegate(s) when they archive or promote the nominated article.
Supports should also follow the featured article criteria. "Support because this is an awesome topic" is not a valid support reason. If you were a major contributor to the article, please note that when you support.
If you only evaluated a subset of the criteria, please note that with your comments. That way other reviewers will see what gaps they need to try to fill.
Check back at the FAC page frequently to see if the nominator has addressed your comments. If the nominator has marked an item addressed, review the change. When you agree that the issue has been resolved, strike through that comment. You may decide at some point to switch from Comments or Oppose to Support; just cross through your previous !vote and explain why you changed your mind.
Helping out at FAR
The featured article review page runs at a slower pace than FAC; nominations are at FAR for at least a month. Declarations to Keep or Remove an article's featured status are not made during the review phase; during the first two weeks (the review phase), reviewers should note deficiencies. If deficiencies are not addressed, the article may move to the featured article removal candidate phase, where reviewers declare Keep or Remove, also based on actionable rationale relative to the standards. If extra time is needed to restore an article to standard, it is usually granted, as long as work is progressing.