Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps

Sweeps was completed in March 2010, after initially beginning in August 2007. A list of all reviewed articles can be seen at the running total page. A list of all of delisted articles was kept, so if you are interested in bringing an article up to GA, this list may be helpful. Thank you to all reviewers who helped complete this monumental task of maintaining the integrity of GAs. The Wikipedia Signpost has an article on GA Sweeps, explaining its origins, purpose, and achievements. There are no plans to repeat the process. Intro The integrity of Wikipedia's Good articles requires that all articles tagged and listed as Good articles meet the criteria. The aim of this project is to "sweep" through the current good articles to check that they meet the criteria. To participate, pick a sub-category at WP:GA and review the articles; take appropriate action, as described below, and mark the sweeps list when reviews of the sub-category have been completed. Editor's contributions can be recorded here. WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: Madame X (album) (talk | history | start review) • Gedling Town F.C. (talk | history | start review) • Reggie Barnes (skateboarder) (talk | history | start review) • Exile (American band) (talk | history | start review) • Jude Law (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Louie Caporusso • Northallerton • Patrick Omameh • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013) Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit Process Progress as of the end of February 2010 For this initial sweep, all Good articles listed before 26 August 2007 need to be reviewed against the GA criteria. Choose articles from the full list of articles left to review. Before reviewing double-check on the running total page if has already been reviewed or is currently on hold (also view the article's talk page to see if it already has been delisted, has become an FA, etc.). Start the review on the talk page of the article by adding {{subst:GAR}}. Save the page, and then follow the first bold link ("individual reassessment") to create the subpage for the review. Review the article against the criteria as you would an article listed at WP:GAN or WP:GAR and save. If the article passes review, in {{ArticleHistory}}, add an entry and classify the action as GAR kept. If an article fails to meet the criteria, list what issues need to be addressed on the subpage. Leave a message on the talk pages of the main contributors of the article (using this tool), the GAN nominator (check the article history), as well as any related WikiProjects. Give editors enough time to respond to the issues (usually a week), and if progress is being made, consider extending the deadline. In the case of a clear failure to meet the criteria, remove the article from WP:GA and leave a message on the review subpage, using {{subst:GASweepsDelist}} with a detailed list of issues below it. In the case of minor issues, or issues which can be easily addressed, try to fix as many problems as you can, list any remaining issues on the review subpage, then allow editors seven days to address them, as you would with "on hold" at GAN. Be sure to keep track of the article. You may find it helpful to use {{subst:GASweepsHold}}. If you are unsure whether the article meets the criteria, or you are not comfortable delisting it, nominate it for community review at Good article reassessment. If you have any questions about the process, leave a message on the talk page. Do your best, remain courteous with the articles' editors (they may have spent a lot of time working on the article and may not want to hear about changes you are recommending), and have fun reviewing! Participation Participants list and progress found here. Considering the entire point of this task force is to improve and uphold the quality of Good articles, only experienced reviewers who are established (trusted) within the project should participate in this initial sweep. It is key that clearly substandard articles be removed from the GA list, while those that are almost there are brought up to current GA standards. The point is to target articles that have "fallen through the cracks", so we can't have any fall through the cracks a second time during this sweep. If you are interested in helping, please leave a message on OhanaUnited's talk page. Keep in mind that we're looking for those individuals that have a very strong understanding of good article criteria and all GA processes. We thank everyone for their interest, but only selected individuals will be invited to participate in the sweeps. Those who have participated can use {{User GA sweeps}} on their user pages. Awards Quality is the goal here. For that reason, awards will be given out based on the quality of reviews, not solely on quantity. What awards will be given out will not all be known until the sweep is completed. Reviews should be done for the betterment of the project and the encyclopedia, not for a star... But you'll still get a star (maybe something better) if you make a significant impact during the sweeps. Running total Keep track of your reviews here.