6/21/2023 0 Comments The secret society wikiGene must be a very fast reader to decide that these sources did not even support the topic as a stub article. To properly evaluate a media reference to see if it truly supports an article, one must READ the article. At least one of these articles had more than 15 credible media sources, by Wikipedia’s own definition. Gene declined six more articles, this time giving them 17.5 minute apiece. Thus, in an hour and 21 minutes, Gene allotted 13.5 minutes to evaluate six new articles. I offer a recent example of how Gene sets aside time during the editing time to race through new articles, declining them all without offering any substantive assistance to the authors.īetween 3:52 and 5:13 on Aug. Gene (not the full username of this person) is a veteran Wikipedia editor who specializes in reviewing new draft articles. Rest assured I could produce more examples. I will offer one example of how these editors behave. We have studied the editing habits of hundreds of volunteer editors in our work as trainers, and the decliners comprises a clear subgroup. Unfortunately, it appears that certain volunteer editors have an agenda that is driven by rejecting all new draft articles without even studying them to see if they do meet Wikipedia’s writing and notability standards. Plenty of poorly written and sourced articles land in Wikipedia’s draft space, articles that should be declined. Instead, they receive a terse note from an editor declining the article and, most often, claiming the topic does not meet the notability standards of Wikipedia articles. They have often spend a good deal of time and work on these drafts, studying editing guidelines and posting the draft for inspection by the volunteer community. One of the most frequent requests for assistance we receive is from those who have, in good faith, started new Wikipedia articles in the designated draft space and have had their drafts immediately declined for promotion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |