Brainstorming improvements to AfC.
Please add to this list. All ideas welcome.
Preliminary reading edit
Ideas edit
Improving reviewers' tools edit
- simplify common workflows
Allowing reviewers to get more done with the same amount of effort edit
- Incentivize submission of drafts with sources, especially "high-quality" sources, by bumping them ahead in the queue; then tell draft authors about that
- Further incentivize authors to only use their "best" sources (scoring system for drafts...?)
- Source highlighters based on RSP/RSN exist, scoring system could detect reliable sources in a similar way, +1 for every instance of a distinct reliable source found (but how to avoid unrelated sources being added just to game the system?)
- Quickfail any drafts using content farm / PR sources masquerading as independent news? (Often take long to discover.)
- Further incentivize authors to only use their "best" sources (scoring system for drafts...?)
- Autodecline blanks, then remove "blank" reason
- Detect only visibly blank issue - i.e. accidental commented out submission (I find a couple a month)
- Auto feedback to submitters of possible issues that if fixed will increase chance of not being rejected/quicker review - maybe tag article, and tags removed as issues addressed. Quick feedback for submitters and reduce load on reviewers
- No references - Difficult to detect but could warn for no ref tags at all
- Bare urls - point them to WP:REFBEGIN
- Sections without any refs - suggest add refs or remove
- Number of refs very small or large for content length
- More than two consecutive refs - possible WP:REFBOMB point to select best source
- detection of common puff words and warn on MOS:PUFFERY
- Warn for overemphasis: too much bolding, lots of ALLCAPS, <big> etc
Reducing the minimum amount of effort required to participate as a reviewer edit
- Split reviewing into subtasks or a checklist (copyvio, sources, prose, doesn't duplicate existing draft or article, WP:MINREF)
- new minimum reviewing task: categorize a single source as one of three options: contributes to notability; doesn't contribute but can be used; can't be used
Finding creative ways to encourage more editors to do reviews edit
- Figure out which drafts are "related to" a particular article or subject area (drafts must be "high quality" first), then put banners on articles or watchlists or wikiprojects ("drafts this project may be interested in")