Main page | Talk page |
Submissions Category — List ( sorting) | Showcase |
Participants Apply — By subject |
Reviewing instructions | Help desk |
Backlog drives |
AfC
submissions Random submission |
3+ months |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation redirects here. |
![]() | Articles for creation Project‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | WikiProject Articles for creation was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 24 December 2018. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
5.43.87.31 ( talk · contribs) modified date timestamps at WP:AFC/R into a different format with this edit. It was subsequently reverted. But if this wasn't caught, would this date format cause problems with the archival bot? -- 64.229.90.32 ( talk) 05:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I was going to accept Draft:Victoria Starmer, because the sources look to me enough to pass GNG, and I couldn't find any major issues with it. Then I realised this had been draftified following this AfD only a month ago, and the sources back then were pretty much the same as now. Given that our ultimate yardstick for assessing drafts is 'would this survive a hypothetical AfD?', and seeing as this one sort of did, sort of didn't, I'm hesitant to just overrule the AfD consensus. Would someone else please take a look and let me know what they think? Ta muchly, -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Despite the reason for existence of GNG coverage (because she is Keirs wife), IMO GNG coverage does exist and my thought would be to accept it. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 13:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
MediaWiki talk:Searchmenu-new § Remove link to the article wizard. –
Novem Linguae (
talk)
20:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Some pending change reviewers accept empty (and thus automatically declined) submissions; and other reviewers reject them; and I simply cannot decide. Do we want to decide this one way or the other? Is there anything to be gained by clogging the list — however little — with pointless, empty, trivially declined entries? Nick Levine ( talk) 16:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Mathglot left a message on my talk page asking me not to edit categories when I am editing AFC drafts. This can be seen at the bottom of my talk page. The example that he gave of what he was asking me not to do is this edit. As an AFC reviewer can see, I was using the yellow Comment button to insert a comment into a draft, and it appears that the script did cleanup on the categories, inserting colons in front of them. However, that was mistaken cleanup, because the categories should be disabled while the draft is in draft, and will be enabled when the draft is accepted. I replied that I know little about categories, and I seldom edit them. If I accept a draft, I normally tag it with {{ Improve categories}} to request that gnomes review the categories. I said that it appeared that the AFCH script was messing with the categories, and that I would start a discussion of the issue at the AFCH talk page (here). So, is the script editing the categories in an incorrect way? Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Could some AfC reviewers please have a look at this draft and the rationale used to reject it. Thank you very much. FloridaArmy ( talk) 11:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
I was looking at reasons for declining, and I see nothing about prose quality when it relates to translation. Should we say something along the lines "avoid declining an article if it is a rough translation; instead, tag it with {{ rough translation}}? @ WhatamIdoing Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
See Special:Diff/1233550011, the script has (in multiple instances on this draft's history) re-added a duplicate comment to the top of the page. Any help in why that is so I can prevent it if I see it again in the future, and what to do to prevent it now would be appreciated. Thanks, microbiologyMarcus petri dish· growths 17:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Why isn't this long serving state legislator notable? I don't understand why the references are objectionable? FloridaArmy ( talk) 16:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi AFC reviewers,
Anyone in their free time, may look at the last four months backlog pending drafts. A cheeseburger from me 🤣. They are:
Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 22:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
What is the policy or consensus on marking accepted AfC drafts as reviewed right away? Should they be left in the queue for another NPP reviewer to check? WP:NPP says "When drafts are approved at AfC and moved to the mainspace they will be checked again by new page patrollers in many instances." I always just leave them for another reviewer but is there an actual policy on this? There is always a fair number of unreviewed accepted AfC drafts at WP:NPPEASY so I wonder if allowing this would help reduce the NPP backlog. C F A 💬 17:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I was reviewing drafts, and came across one with the notation: I have to reject this without prejudice to accept when there is a line of notability. I mean if this goes to AFD, the possible outcome may be to delete or draftify as
WP:TOOSOON.
I partially reverted the rejection, because I think that there was a
good-faith misunderstanding by the reviewer of when Rejection should and should not be used. As I understand it, the whole point to Rejection is that it is with prejudice, so that a draft which is
too soon for
significant coverage should be declined for notability. It is my understanding that rejection for notability should be used in hopeless situations. I use rejection for notability mainly when there was an
AFD, and there is no reason given to think that the situation has changed, or if there is no
credible claim of significance, so that
A7 would apply in article space. I have used the latter on what are really social media profiles. So do other reviewers agree that this was a
good faith misunderstanding of rejection?
Robert McClenon (
talk)
18:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I will also ask a question that I have probably asked before, and that is what if any procedure should be followed if a draft was rejected and the originator wants it reconsidered. I will also ask another question that I know I have asked before, and that is what options reviewers have if a draft was rejected, and is resubmitted tendentiously. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Just recently, when I logged-in, I got a pop-up message showing some sort of AFCH Error, and i misclicked on the pop-up disabling my ability to review. Somebody help me understand what is happening. Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 13:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
AFCH error: user not listed AFCH could not be loaded because "Ken Tony" is not listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. You can request access to the AfC helper script there. If you wish to disable the helper script, click here. If you have any questions or concerns, please get in touch! Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 13:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Are any admins here able to check if Draft:Nitish Rajput is G4able after the AfD three days ago? Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 14:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
"It excludes pages in userspace and draftspace where the content was converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy)."). If it's a recreation of a substantially same content as was deleted following AfD, then it can be G4'd.
I can't find it again but this was one concern of someone asking a question in the Teahouse which I found in the archives.
The person was told about the difference and said they had tried to find information on the distinction but couldn't.
If I'm asking in the wrong place, I don't see a better one.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
I came across Draft:Philip Blood and Draft:Philip W. Blood while checking on the licensing the imge used in the main infobox of each. These drafts appear to be identical except for their titles. They both also been submitted to AfC for review and declined. Are they both needed? Should they be merged together? The creator is the same person, and they might've mistakeny thought they needed to create a "new draft" after the first one they created was declined. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 07:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I have been queried with my decline of this draft on the submitting editor's talk page, and I may be in error. If I am please tell me kindly. It may be a case of "Never review when you are tired" if I am in error. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation has a small navigation pane with "Top of page / Table of Contents / Bottom of page" links generated by Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/header, added by User:Timtrent in October 2023. It seems to be mostly redundant to the {{ skip to top and bottom}} that the talkpage uses, but no objection if anyone thinks is friendlier to have text as well as arrows. Might be useful to refactor to implement as a optional feature in that template? But the TOC link does not work on Vector2022 because the TOC is no longer a "section" of the article pane and it no longer appears to have the same anchor-name. If this feature is worth keeping, I wonder if there is a way to determine the skin at load-time (or use CSS to control it). Or what the value is in jumping to the TOC that is presumably right near the full top-of-page. DMacks ( talk) 19:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I accepted a draft which I solely know meets
WP:GNG, however another editor interested in suspected
WP:SOCKPUPPETRY i.e may be created by a sock (though I didn't see that, and judged the article by its merit not creator). I have to take it to AFD for a general consensus. Now when @
Liz was closing the AFD as keep, she
made the closing comment, "The result was keep. FYI: Please do not bring articles to AFD unless you are seeking their deletion.
To me, I disagree that an article needing clarification shouldn't be taken to AFD. I think I learnt that from @
Joe Roe.
Safari Scribe
Edits!
Talk!
19:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Main page | Talk page |
Submissions Category — List ( sorting) | Showcase |
Participants Apply — By subject |
Reviewing instructions | Help desk |
Backlog drives |
AfC
submissions Random submission |
3+ months |
![]() | To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation redirects here. |
![]() | Articles for creation Project‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | WikiProject Articles for creation was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 24 December 2018. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 20 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
5.43.87.31 ( talk · contribs) modified date timestamps at WP:AFC/R into a different format with this edit. It was subsequently reverted. But if this wasn't caught, would this date format cause problems with the archival bot? -- 64.229.90.32 ( talk) 05:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
I was going to accept Draft:Victoria Starmer, because the sources look to me enough to pass GNG, and I couldn't find any major issues with it. Then I realised this had been draftified following this AfD only a month ago, and the sources back then were pretty much the same as now. Given that our ultimate yardstick for assessing drafts is 'would this survive a hypothetical AfD?', and seeing as this one sort of did, sort of didn't, I'm hesitant to just overrule the AfD consensus. Would someone else please take a look and let me know what they think? Ta muchly, -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Despite the reason for existence of GNG coverage (because she is Keirs wife), IMO GNG coverage does exist and my thought would be to accept it. Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 13:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at
MediaWiki talk:Searchmenu-new § Remove link to the article wizard. –
Novem Linguae (
talk)
20:01, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Some pending change reviewers accept empty (and thus automatically declined) submissions; and other reviewers reject them; and I simply cannot decide. Do we want to decide this one way or the other? Is there anything to be gained by clogging the list — however little — with pointless, empty, trivially declined entries? Nick Levine ( talk) 16:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Mathglot left a message on my talk page asking me not to edit categories when I am editing AFC drafts. This can be seen at the bottom of my talk page. The example that he gave of what he was asking me not to do is this edit. As an AFC reviewer can see, I was using the yellow Comment button to insert a comment into a draft, and it appears that the script did cleanup on the categories, inserting colons in front of them. However, that was mistaken cleanup, because the categories should be disabled while the draft is in draft, and will be enabled when the draft is accepted. I replied that I know little about categories, and I seldom edit them. If I accept a draft, I normally tag it with {{ Improve categories}} to request that gnomes review the categories. I said that it appeared that the AFCH script was messing with the categories, and that I would start a discussion of the issue at the AFCH talk page (here). So, is the script editing the categories in an incorrect way? Robert McClenon ( talk) 22:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Could some AfC reviewers please have a look at this draft and the rationale used to reject it. Thank you very much. FloridaArmy ( talk) 11:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
I was looking at reasons for declining, and I see nothing about prose quality when it relates to translation. Should we say something along the lines "avoid declining an article if it is a rough translation; instead, tag it with {{ rough translation}}? @ WhatamIdoing Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
See Special:Diff/1233550011, the script has (in multiple instances on this draft's history) re-added a duplicate comment to the top of the page. Any help in why that is so I can prevent it if I see it again in the future, and what to do to prevent it now would be appreciated. Thanks, microbiologyMarcus petri dish· growths 17:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Why isn't this long serving state legislator notable? I don't understand why the references are objectionable? FloridaArmy ( talk) 16:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi AFC reviewers,
Anyone in their free time, may look at the last four months backlog pending drafts. A cheeseburger from me 🤣. They are:
Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 22:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
What is the policy or consensus on marking accepted AfC drafts as reviewed right away? Should they be left in the queue for another NPP reviewer to check? WP:NPP says "When drafts are approved at AfC and moved to the mainspace they will be checked again by new page patrollers in many instances." I always just leave them for another reviewer but is there an actual policy on this? There is always a fair number of unreviewed accepted AfC drafts at WP:NPPEASY so I wonder if allowing this would help reduce the NPP backlog. C F A 💬 17:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I was reviewing drafts, and came across one with the notation: I have to reject this without prejudice to accept when there is a line of notability. I mean if this goes to AFD, the possible outcome may be to delete or draftify as
WP:TOOSOON.
I partially reverted the rejection, because I think that there was a
good-faith misunderstanding by the reviewer of when Rejection should and should not be used. As I understand it, the whole point to Rejection is that it is with prejudice, so that a draft which is
too soon for
significant coverage should be declined for notability. It is my understanding that rejection for notability should be used in hopeless situations. I use rejection for notability mainly when there was an
AFD, and there is no reason given to think that the situation has changed, or if there is no
credible claim of significance, so that
A7 would apply in article space. I have used the latter on what are really social media profiles. So do other reviewers agree that this was a
good faith misunderstanding of rejection?
Robert McClenon (
talk)
18:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I will also ask a question that I have probably asked before, and that is what if any procedure should be followed if a draft was rejected and the originator wants it reconsidered. I will also ask another question that I know I have asked before, and that is what options reviewers have if a draft was rejected, and is resubmitted tendentiously. Robert McClenon ( talk) 18:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Just recently, when I logged-in, I got a pop-up message showing some sort of AFCH Error, and i misclicked on the pop-up disabling my ability to review. Somebody help me understand what is happening. Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 13:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
AFCH error: user not listed AFCH could not be loaded because "Ken Tony" is not listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. You can request access to the AfC helper script there. If you wish to disable the helper script, click here. If you have any questions or concerns, please get in touch! Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 13:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Are any admins here able to check if Draft:Nitish Rajput is G4able after the AfD three days ago? Curb Safe Charmer ( talk) 14:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
"It excludes pages in userspace and draftspace where the content was converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy)."). If it's a recreation of a substantially same content as was deleted following AfD, then it can be G4'd.
I can't find it again but this was one concern of someone asking a question in the Teahouse which I found in the archives.
The person was told about the difference and said they had tried to find information on the distinction but couldn't.
If I'm asking in the wrong place, I don't see a better one.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
I came across Draft:Philip Blood and Draft:Philip W. Blood while checking on the licensing the imge used in the main infobox of each. These drafts appear to be identical except for their titles. They both also been submitted to AfC for review and declined. Are they both needed? Should they be merged together? The creator is the same person, and they might've mistakeny thought they needed to create a "new draft" after the first one they created was declined. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 07:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I have been queried with my decline of this draft on the submitting editor's talk page, and I may be in error. If I am please tell me kindly. It may be a case of "Never review when you are tired" if I am in error. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:19, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation has a small navigation pane with "Top of page / Table of Contents / Bottom of page" links generated by Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/header, added by User:Timtrent in October 2023. It seems to be mostly redundant to the {{ skip to top and bottom}} that the talkpage uses, but no objection if anyone thinks is friendlier to have text as well as arrows. Might be useful to refactor to implement as a optional feature in that template? But the TOC link does not work on Vector2022 because the TOC is no longer a "section" of the article pane and it no longer appears to have the same anchor-name. If this feature is worth keeping, I wonder if there is a way to determine the skin at load-time (or use CSS to control it). Or what the value is in jumping to the TOC that is presumably right near the full top-of-page. DMacks ( talk) 19:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I accepted a draft which I solely know meets
WP:GNG, however another editor interested in suspected
WP:SOCKPUPPETRY i.e may be created by a sock (though I didn't see that, and judged the article by its merit not creator). I have to take it to AFD for a general consensus. Now when @
Liz was closing the AFD as keep, she
made the closing comment, "The result was keep. FYI: Please do not bring articles to AFD unless you are seeking their deletion.
To me, I disagree that an article needing clarification shouldn't be taken to AFD. I think I learnt that from @
Joe Roe.
Safari Scribe
Edits!
Talk!
19:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)