Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/October 2020

MainCriteriaInstructionsNominationsDiscussionOctober 2020
Backlog drive
ReassessmentReport

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 guidelinesEdit

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.

ProgressEdit

Date Outstanding
nominations
Unreviewed
nominations
Change since
previous day[N 1]
Change since
beginning[N 1]
1 October 2020 606 552
2 October 2020 598 508 Positive decrease 44 (8%) Positive decrease 44 (8%)
3 October 2020 582 485 Positive decrease 23 (4.5%) Positive decrease 67 (12.1%)
4 October 2020 578 473 Positive decrease 12 (2.5%) Positive decrease 79 (14.3%)
5 October 2020 560 450 Positive decrease 23 (4.9%) Positive decrease 102 (18.5%)
6 October 2020 555 438 Positive decrease 12 (2.7%) Positive decrease 114 (20.7%)
7 October 2020 548 427 Positive decrease 11 (2.5%) Positive decrease 125 (22.6%)
8 October 2020 540 415 Positive decrease 12 (2.8%) Positive decrease 137 (24.8%)
9 October 2020 531 404 Positive decrease 11 (2.7%) Positive decrease 148 (26.8%)
10 October 2020 530 399 Positive decrease  5 (1.2%) Positive decrease 153 (27.7%)
11 October 2020 518 394 Positive decrease  5 (1.3%) Positive decrease 158 (28.6%)
12 October 2020 510 386 Positive decrease  8 (2%) Positive decrease 166 (30.1%)
13 October 2020 506 383 Positive decrease  3 (0.8%) Positive decrease 169 (30.6%)
14 October 2020 500 367 Positive decrease 16 (4.2%) Positive decrease 185 (33.5%)
15 October 2020 493 350 Positive decrease 17 (4.6%) Positive decrease 202 (36.6%)
16 October 2020 477 356 Negative increase  6 (1.7%) Positive decrease 196 (35.5%)
17 October 2020 473 348 Positive decrease  8 (2.2%) Positive decrease 204 (37%)
18 October 2020 467 342 Positive decrease  6 (1.7%) Positive decrease 210 (38%)
19 October 2020 462 341 Positive decrease  1 (0.3%) Positive decrease 211 (38.2%)
20 October 2020 453 340 Positive decrease  1 (0.3%) Positive decrease 212 (38.4%)
21 October 2020 440 335 Positive decrease  5 (1.5%) Positive decrease 217 (39.3%)
22 October 2020 439 335 Steady  0 (0%) Positive decrease 217 (39.3%)
  1. ^ a b Change refers only to unreviewed nominations.

AwardsEdit

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.

This is the scheme for the awards:

Invisible Barnstar Hires.png At least 2 GANs reviewed: The Invisible Barnstar

Working Man's Barnstar.png At least 5 GANs reviewed: The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif At least 10 GANs reviewed: The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

Reviewer Barnstar Hires.png At least 15 GANs reviewed: The Reviewer Barnstar

Multiple GA Barnstar.png At least 20 GANs reviewed: The Multiple Good Article Reviewer Barnstar

GA Award.png At least 30 GANs reviewed: The WikiProject Good Articles Medal of Merit

SuperiorContentReviewScribe.png At least 50 GANs reviewed: The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia

CRM.png 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 totalEdit

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.)

====[[User:Username|Username]]====
{{Div col}} 
#{{icon|GA}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
#{{icon|DA}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
#{{icon|GAH}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
#{{icon|GAN}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]]
{{Div col end}}

ParticipantsEdit

AjpolinoEdit

Alanna the BraveEdit

ArnabSahaEdit

Amitchell125Edit

Aza24Edit

BabegrievEdit

Bait30Edit

BennyOnTheLooseEdit

  1. Good article 2005 World Snooker Championship
  2. Good article Mary Two-Axe Earley Green tickY Harrias (he/him) • talk 14:27, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
  3. Good article Mark Selby

BilorvEdit

CatlemurEdit

Cavie78Edit

Chris TroutmanEdit

David FuchsEdit

Eddie891Edit

EpicgeniusEdit

FootlessmouseEdit

Gog the MildEdit

HarriasEdit

HickoryOughtShirt?4Edit

Hog FarmEdit

ImaginestigersEdit

Jon698Edit

KingsifEdit

Kyle PeakeEdit

Lee VilenskiEdit

Lirim.ZEdit

  1. Demoted article Talk:Blackstar (album)/GA1

Lazman321Edit

MoneytreesEdit

MrLinkinPark333Edit

MSG17Edit

MujingaEdit

MWright96Edit

No Great ShakerEdit

OulfisEdit

RaymieEdit

REDMAN 2019Edit

Red PhoenixEdit

Tayi ArajakateEdit

TRMEdit

SerAntoniDeMiloniEdit

TheSandDoctorEdit

The Most Comfortable ChairEdit

The Ultimate BossEdit

Vincent60030Edit

Wasted Time REdit