Forum:CT:New Article Review System

Forums > Consensus track archive > CT:New Article Review System
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in the Senate Hall or new Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.
The result of the debate was Support proposal. Imperators II(Talk) 09:57, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Following up on Forum:SH: JocastaBot 5.0: Paperwork's Greatest Enemy, here's a formal CT to institute this new system. In summary:

  • When a status article has an issue, any user can create a review page for the article one of two ways. Firstly (using Comprehensive articles as an example), by adding the {{CAreview}} template to the top of the article, and creating the linked review at Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article reviews/Example. Alternatively, they can issue a command in the Wookieepedia Discord to JocastaBot, who will complete the same steps. The user should then leave their objections on the review page.
  • All active reviews for a particular status type will be transcluded as subpages on their parent page at Wookieepedia:Featured article reviews, Wookieepedia:Good article reviews, and Wookieepedia:Comprehensive article reviews.
  • Any user can address an objection, and any user can add additional objections to the review page at any time. Only the objector, or the appropriate review board, may strike their own objection,
  • Once a day, JocastaBot will report the status of all active review pages to the #status-article-reviews channel in Discord.
  • Members of the appropriate review board will vote support on a review page when they feel that the article has returned to an appropriate level of quality. Once 3 members have voted support, an article review may be closed.
  • To close a review, review board members can issue the appropriate command to JocastaBot, which will remove the review template from the article, archive the subpage, and update the article's talk page history.
  • If an article continues to have outstanding objections after 30 days, or undergoes drastic changes in content or quality, members of the review board can instruct JocastaBot to mark it as On Probation, which will change the review template to indicate its status, as well as changing the parameter in {{Top}} to pfa, pga or pca respectively, which changes the icons to yellow and recategorizes the article.
  • If an article continues in this state for a lengthy period of time, the review board members may vote on the review page to strip it of its original status. When 3 members vote in favor, a command to JocastaBot will remove the review template and article's status parameter, archive the review page, and update the article's talk page history.
  • Finally, the current system of review board meetings, probes and probe pages will be abandoned. All articles currently due to be probed will receive review pages in the new system, and the review board will decided on a case-by-case basis whether or not to migrate or complete each of the currently-active probes.

The only other thing the system needs at this point to be completed is yellow versions of the status icons, which I'll leave to the image-talented people. Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 22:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Support

  1. otherwise I wouldn't have done all this lol Cade GalacticRepublicEmblem-Traced-TORkit Calrayn 22:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  2. 01miki10 Open comlink 22:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  3. we love you Cade! OOM 224 (he/him) 22:58, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  4. Great work! HeadSpikesWalls (she/they) RainbowRebellion2 (talk!) 22:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  5. Dentface (talk) 23:00, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  6. ThrawnChiss7 ThrawnHS Alliances Assembly Cupola 23:07, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  7. Still amazed that all this is possible VergenceScatter (talk) 23:37, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
  8. —spookywillowwtalk 01:18, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  9. CT-1742 Clone Army patch (talk) 01:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  10. Shall we call it NARS Loqiical (talk) 03:20, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  11. Enderdrag64 (talk) 04:12, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  12. Exiled Jedi (talk) 04:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  13. Looks like review board members (who this creates a little work for) support it, and that's what I needed to see! Immi Thrax RainbowRebellion2 (she/her) 04:25, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  14. I like this! —SnowedLightning (they/them) 05:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  15. - Thannus (DFaceG) (he/him) (talk) 06:04, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  16. Imperators II(Talk) 09:36, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  17. Might be worth working in an instant kill feature in future for when an article goes under and someone wants to immediately take it to nominate it on a different board, but it's not essential. Amazing work on this Cade! Ayrehead02 (talk) 17:02, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  18. Per Ayre. And great work! LucaRoR Sigil of House Serenno (Talk) 17:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  19. Rsand 30 (talk) 17:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  20. Fan26 (Talk) 18:00, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  21. I'm going to miss the funny meeting pages. :( Samonic Signatureicon (he/him) 18:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  22. Braha'tok enthusiast Hello there 18:07, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
  23. #CadeGoat JediMasterMacaroni(Talk) 05:01, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  24. I predict this will greatly increase the chances of articles being fixed and reduce the number stripped of status, thus increasing the overall quality of articles across the board. Plus, I'm so happy to not have meeting paperwork or to have to remember to leave notes since actually attending meetings is basically impossible at this point. Master FredceriqueCommerce Guild(talk) (he/him) 08:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  25. NBDani TeamFireballLogo-Collider(they/them)Yeager's Repairs 10:27, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
  26. We can almost retire! Supreme Emperor Holocomm 05:28, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
  27. But I haven't even attended a meeting or had the joy of doing paperwork. Oh no. Stop. Don't do that. Manoof (he/him/his) RainbowRebellion2 06:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss