Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/September 2019

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
MainCriteriaNominationsSeptember 2019
Backlog drive
DiscussionInstructionsReassessmentReportHelp Desk

The 2019 September GAN Backlog Drive is a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of Good Article nominations. Please ensure that you familiarise yourself with the Good Article review process before starting to review an article, and that you are familiar with the GA criteria and the Manual of Style. Also, it is recommended reading the essays What the Good article criteria are not and Reviewing good articles. The co-ordinator for this drive is User:Barkeep49 with User:Lee Vilenski. If you have any questions, leave a message on this drive's talk page. The drive began on 1 September 2019 at 00:00:01 (UTC) and ends on 30 September 2019 at 23:59:59 (UTC). This is the first backlog elimination drive to be held in over three years.

The ultimate goal of this backlog elimination drive is to cut the number of outstanding GANs and in particular those which have been in the queue 90 days or more. Awards will be given out to those individuals who do the most work in helping reduce the size of the backlog and reach milestones, such as reviewing 15 GANs, vice versa. This backlog drive is modeled on the highly successful December 2011 and August 2016 drives; as a result, points will not be rewarded nor will the reviewer be judged on how long their review is. This is to ensure a faster rate of decreasing backlog whilst maintaining quality reviews. Consequently, "quick-fails" are allowed, only if the article is in exceptionally bad shape. If a participant is found rapidly rubber-stamping GANs that do not meet the criteria, they may be disqualified. Each review will be checked by a co-ordinator to ensure that this does not happen.

Basic guidelines[edit]

  1. Give preference to older nominations. While any review counts for the drive, please give extra consideration to nominations which have been in the queue 90 days or more.
  2. Log completed GANs here. If you complete a GAN for an article, don't forget to list it here so that you can get credit for the review.
  3. No rubber-stamping GANs. Good Article nominations tend to result in even better improvements if a reasonable amount of issues are brought up in a review. This can be especially useful when approaching Featured Article standing. Quick-fails are allowed if the article is in exceptionally poor shape or per the GA criteria page. Each review and its article will be checked by the co-ordinator to ensure that rubber-stamping does not happen.
  4. Minimum length/quality Only reviews of a sufficient length will be counted; quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be given credit. As a rough guide, no review shorter than 1000 bytes will be considered, though the judges reserve the right to remove other short reviews. This is not to say that such short reviews are not worthwhile, it is merely to say that they will not be recognised in this competition.
  5. Provide constructive criticism. If you see a problem or problems in a certain article you're reviewing, don't be afraid to point that out and indicate to the nominator what's wrong. Instead of merely pointing to the problems, guide the nominator to possible ways of fixing those problems. Similarly, if the article is not of Good Article quality yet, don't be afraid to fail, but make sure you provide guidance as to how to get the article up to GA quality.
  6. Stick with it. An article isn't improved if it remains on hold for months. Instead, make the smaller corrections, make sure the primary writer is actively editing, and make the pass/fail judgement if concerns are/are not addressed in a timely matter. Generally, it is standard for a GA review to be on hold for seven days, however the reviewer may close their review when they see fit.
  7. Have fun. We're here to help bring these articles up to their fullest potential and hence improving the overall quality of the encyclopaedia. If you do not enjoy doing that, then there is no motivation to improve these articles and the encyclopaedia as a whole.


Date Outstanding
Change since
previous day[N 1]
Change since
beginning[N 1]
1 September 2019 626 533
2 September 2019 622 519 Positive decrease 14 Positive decrease 14
3 September 2019 620 513 Positive decrease  6 Positive decrease 20
4 September 2019 616 511 Positive decrease  2 Positive decrease 22
5 September 2019 615 511 Steady  0 Positive decrease 22
6 September 2019 608 508 Positive decrease  3 Positive decrease 25
7 September 2019 604 494 Positive decrease 14 Positive decrease 39
8 September 2019 593 484 Positive decrease 10 Positive decrease 49
9 September 2019 591 481 Positive decrease  3 Positive decrease 52
10 September 2019 583 472 Positive decrease  9 Positive decrease 61
11 September 2019 580 465 Positive decrease  7 Positive decrease 68
12 September 2019 583 464 Positive decrease  1 Positive decrease 69
13 September 2019 579 438 Positive decrease 26 Positive decrease 95
14 September 2019 564 427 Positive decrease 11 Positive decrease 106
15 September 2019 552 416 Positive decrease 11 Positive decrease 117
16 September 2019 549 410 Positive decrease  6 Positive decrease 123
17 September 2019 547 408 Positive decrease  2 Positive decrease 125
18 September 2019 537 396 Positive decrease 12 Positive decrease 137
19 September 2019 534 388 Positive decrease  8 Positive decrease 145
20 September 2019 524 382 Positive decrease  6 Positive decrease 151
  1. ^ a b Change only refers to unreviewed nominations.


To receive an award, please include your name and the number of reviews you have completed as part of this drive. Please keep a running total next to your name. Awards will be given by the co-ordinator after this drive ends.

This is the scheme for the awards:

Invisible Barnstar Hires.png At least 2 GANs reviewed: The Invisible Barnstar.

Working Man's Barnstar.png At least 5 GANs reviewed: The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar.

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif At least 10 GANs reviewed: The Tireless Contributor Barnstar.

Multiple GA Barnstar.png At least 15 GANs reviewed: The Multiple Good Article Reviewer Barnstar

GA Award.png At least 20 GANs reviewed: The WikiProject Good Articles Medal of Merit.

SuperiorContentReviewScribe.png At least 30 GANs reviewed: The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia.

CRM.png In addition, the person who reviews the most Good Article nominations during the backlog elimination drive will receive the Content Review Medal of Merit.

Running total[edit]

Only passes and fails will be recognised as completing a review. If necessary, you can put the article on hold if the article needs to be edited further to be passed. Once you have passed or failed the article after putting it on hold, then include your review below. Article reviews started before 30 September but completed after 30 September are eligible to be counted into the running total. Reviews started before 1 September do not count. Please state if the article is a pass, fail, or on hold. Make sure you follow up reviews that have been placed on hold.

Please log entries in the following format:

{{Div col}} 
#{{icon|GA}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
#{{icon|DA}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
#{{icon|GAH}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
{{Div col end}}


1.02 editor[edit]



  1. Good article Hormizd IV ☑Y Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  2. Good article Hauran ☑Yold nom Barkeep49 (talk) 75 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  3. Good article British and Irish Magnetic Telegraph Company ☑Yold nom Barkeep49 (talk) 183 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  4. Good article Ankh 284 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  5. Good article Peroz I Kushanshah 1 backlog day AmericanAir88(talk)
  6. Good article Kepler-47☑Yold nom Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)
  7. Good article on hold Francis March


  1. Good article Vojtěch Jarník☑Yold nom Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)



Canada Hky[edit]

  1. Good article on hold Ehlers-Danlos syndromes 83 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  2. Good article on hold Folate 137 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  3. Good article Andersen–Tawil_syndrome☑Yold nom Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)90 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)





David Fuchs[edit]

Femke Nijsse[edit]

  1. Good article Norway debate 106 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)


  1. Good article Guallatiri☑Yold nom Barkeep49 (talk) 211 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  2. Good articleVailulu'u ☑Yold nom Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 207 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  3. Demoted article Bradenton Riverwalk☑Yold nom Barkeep49 (talk) 335 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  4. Good articleThe Ramble and Lake☑Yold nom Barkeep49 (talk) 129 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  5. Good article on holdSlabinja 335 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  6. Good articleHawthorne, Florida☒NGiven that a GAR has already been filed Barkeep49 (talk) 272 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  7. Good articleMill Basin, Brooklyn 294 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  8. Good article on holdTel Yokneam 237 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)
  9. Good article on holdBelknap Crater 112 backlog days AmericanAir88(talk)

Gog the Mild[edit]




J Milburn[edit]




Lee Vilenski[edit]

  1. Good article Doctor Who (series 6) ☑Yold nom Barkeep49 (talk)
  2. Good article 7/27☑Y Barkeep49 (talk)
  3. Failed good article nominee Elfern☑Yold nomI'm confused about timing of this given some of the sig dates Barkeep49 (talk)
  4. Good article Ding Junhui☑Y Barkeep49 (talk)
  5. Good article on hold Baltimore Skipjacks
  6. Good article Vivi Ornitier
  7. Good article on hold Fran (Final Fantasy)







Sturmvogel 66[edit]






  1. Good article Carlos Landín Martínez Red XN Not a detailed review — Wizardman
  2. Good article Laurent Eketebi Red XN Not a detailed review — Wizardman