Articles for Creation broken

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Articles for Creation broken

cro0016
So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria.

I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged.

Some may think that the bar at AFC is set too high but this high bar discourages new users, especially when their submissions stay unreviewed for weeks at a time. And since editor retention is something we are trying to focus on, it seems a worthy project since many new users have their first experiences in AFC. The lack of volunteers in wikiprojects like AFC is not a new thing, so it's not that volunteers have reduced. I think we need to consider if AFC is something we still want to have, and if so, how can we improve it?


Steve Zhang
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Articles for Creation broken

Wyatt Lucas
On 8/17/2012 7:36 AM, Steven Zhang wrote:

> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria.
>
> I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged.
>
> Some may think that the bar at AFC is set too high but this high bar discourages new users, especially when their submissions stay unreviewed for weeks at a time. And since editor retention is something we are trying to focus on, it seems a worthy project since many new users have their first experiences in AFC. The lack of volunteers in wikiprojects like AFC is not a new thing, so it's not that volunteers have reduced. I think we need to consider if AFC is something we still want to have, and if so, how can we improve it?
>
>
> Steve Zhang
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I've never really seen the point in AfC, beyond companies submitting COI
articles. Can't a user just create the article themselves? Maybe we
should focus on giving the 'confirmed' user right to users who want to
create an article, and that way there won't be this huge AfC backlog.
Also, making it easier for laymen to edit (e.g. with the visual editor)
would be very helpful in this pursuit.

--
~~yutsi


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Articles for Creation broken

Charles Matthews
In reply to this post by cro0016
On 17 August 2012 12:36, Steven Zhang <[hidden email]> wrote:
> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria.
>
> I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged.
>
> Some may think that the bar at AFC is set too high but this high bar discourages new users, especially when their submissions stay unreviewed for weeks at a time. And since editor retention is something we are trying to focus on, it seems a worthy project since many new users have their first experiences in AFC. The lack of volunteers in wikiprojects like AFC is not a new thing, so it's not that volunteers have reduced. I think we need to consider if AFC is something we still want to have, and if so, how can we improve it?

You are saying that there is a backlog (a problem of success), so the
thing is broken? I know attention-seeking rhetoric is normal in our
discussions, but what exactly is your logic? You preferred the older
system. I don't know what you are saying about the high bar.

Charles

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Articles for Creation broken

Katie Chan
In reply to this post by cro0016
On 17/08/2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria.

I can't remember the number off the top of my head, but the number of
submissions per day back then and the number of submission now is on a
totally different order. The solution is to get more experienced editors
reviewing submissions.

> I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged.

I agree to that to an extent but one major advantage with the current
subpage system is the retention of page history when an accepted
submission is moved to mainspace compare to previously where the
reviewing editor start a new page and manually copy and paste the
submission over.

KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
     - Heinrich Heine

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Articles for Creation broken

Steven Zhang-2
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews

On 17/08/2012, at 10:55 PM, Charles Matthews <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> You are saying that there is a backlog (a problem of success), so the
> thing is broken? I know attention-seeking rhetoric is normal in our
> discussions, but what exactly is your logic? You preferred the older
> system. I don't know what you are saying about the high bar.

        I think that the use of Articles for Creation is a good thing - don't get me wrong. I just think that if articles are waiting weeks and weeks for reviewing, then it's doing a disservice to those who contribute this new content to Wikipedia - they may give up on it before it's even been reviewed. I don't think this necessarily means that we should get rid of the process, but we should at least think about how we can address the situation so it does not occur again.

>
> Charles
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Steven Zhang



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Articles for Creation broken

Steven Zhang-2
In reply to this post by Katie Chan
On 17/08/2012, at 11:06 PM, Katie Chan <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 17/08/2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
>> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria.
>
> I can't remember the number off the top of my head, but the number of submissions per day back then and the number of submission now is on a totally different order. The solution is to get more experienced editors reviewing submissions.
       
        The solution indeed would be to get more people participating, there's no doubt in that, but with over 1000 pending submissions (not declined, pending) we need to think about what else we can do to fix this.
>
>> I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged.
>
> I agree to that to an extent but one major advantage with the current subpage system is the retention of page history when an accepted submission is moved to mainspace compare to previously where the reviewing editor start a new page and manually copy and paste the submission over.

        Perhaps we could restructure things so it's like AFD - in a daily log, everything subpaged but all new submissions in one single page per day - then we can check each day off once it's done. This worked in the past, I think it would work now.
>
> KTC
>
> --
> Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
>    - Heinrich Heine
>
>


Steven Zhang
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Articles for Creation broken

Katie Chan
On 19/08/2012 03:13, Steven Zhang wrote:
> On 17/08/2012, at 11:06 PM, Katie Chan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 17/08/2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
>>> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000 pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day were on one page, and people could come along and approve or reject based in certain criteria.
>>
>> I can't remember the number off the top of my head, but the number of submissions per day back then and the number of submission now is on a totally different order. The solution is to get more experienced editors reviewing submissions.
>
> The solution indeed would be to get more people participating, there's no doubt in that, but with over 1000 pending submissions (not declined, pending) we need to think about what else we can do to fix this.

It'd down to 370 at the moment, which is consider normal even if it's
still a bit high for my liking.

>>> I think that system worked well. True, we have a lot more article creations, but I think it gave more visibility than the current system where everything is subpaged.
>>
>> I agree to that to an extent but one major advantage with the current subpage system is the retention of page history when an accepted submission is moved to mainspace compare to previously where the reviewing editor start a new page and manually copy and paste the submission over.
>
> Perhaps we could restructure things so it's like AFD - in a daily log, everything subpaged but all new submissions in one single page per day - then we can check each day off once it's done. This worked in the past, I think it would work now.
>>

Sounds good, propose it at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for
creation]]?

KTC

--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
     - Heinrich Heine

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l