The 2020 October GAN Backlog Drive is a one-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-ordinators for this drive are
Harrias,
Eddie891 and
Lee Vilenski. If you have any questions, leave a message on this drive's talk page. The drive begins on 1 October 2020 at 00:00:01 (UTC) and ends on 31 October 2020 at 23:59:59 (UTC).
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 modelled on the
September 2019 drive; as a result, no additional points will be awarded based on how long a 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
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.
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.
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.
Minimum quality Only reviews of a sufficient quality will be counted; quick fails and very short reviews may not be given credit. As a rough guide, no review shorter than 1,000 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.
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.
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.
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.
Progress
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on
Phabricator and on
MediaWiki.org.
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.
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
Keep a running total of your reviewing in the Participants section below by creating your own list. 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. Each of your reviews should be included in your list. Article reviews started before 31 October but completed after 31 October can be included in the running total - however should be completed as quickly as possible to avoid being too late. Reviews started before 1 October do not count. Please state if the article is a pass, fail, or on hold. Make sure you follow up on reviews that you have started or placed on hold.
A sample review section is below; all sections start with a fourth-level header containing the editor's username and the {{
Div col}} template, and end with the {{
Div col end}} template. Between those templates, each article reviewed is given its own line. Use the "GA" icon line for an article that passes, the "DA" icon line for an article that fails, the "GAH" icon line for an article where the initial review is complete and has been placed on hold, and the "GAN" icon line for an article where the review has started but has not yet been placed on hold. (Change "GAN" and "GAH" to "GA" or "DA" when the article passes or fails.)
The 2020 October GAN Backlog Drive is a one-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-ordinators for this drive are
Harrias,
Eddie891 and
Lee Vilenski. If you have any questions, leave a message on this drive's talk page. The drive begins on 1 October 2020 at 00:00:01 (UTC) and ends on 31 October 2020 at 23:59:59 (UTC).
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 modelled on the
September 2019 drive; as a result, no additional points will be awarded based on how long a 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
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.
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.
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.
Minimum quality Only reviews of a sufficient quality will be counted; quick fails and very short reviews may not be given credit. As a rough guide, no review shorter than 1,000 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.
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.
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.
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.
Progress
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on
Phabricator and on
MediaWiki.org.
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.
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
Keep a running total of your reviewing in the Participants section below by creating your own list. 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. Each of your reviews should be included in your list. Article reviews started before 31 October but completed after 31 October can be included in the running total - however should be completed as quickly as possible to avoid being too late. Reviews started before 1 October do not count. Please state if the article is a pass, fail, or on hold. Make sure you follow up on reviews that you have started or placed on hold.
A sample review section is below; all sections start with a fourth-level header containing the editor's username and the {{
Div col}} template, and end with the {{
Div col end}} template. Between those templates, each article reviewed is given its own line. Use the "GA" icon line for an article that passes, the "DA" icon line for an article that fails, the "GAH" icon line for an article where the initial review is complete and has been placed on hold, and the "GAN" icon line for an article where the review has started but has not yet been placed on hold. (Change "GAN" and "GAH" to "GA" or "DA" when the article passes or fails.)