Submissions:2018/When Good is Great: All about the Good Article process


 * Title: When Good is sometimes Great and sometimes S L O W: All about the Good Article process


 * Theme (optional): Content Creation


 * Academic Peer Review option: No


 * Type of submission:Presentation


 * Author:


 * E-mail address: barkeep49@barkeep49@gmail.com


 * Wikimedia username: barkeep49


 * Affiliation(s) (optional):

The Wikipedia Good Article designation is designed to be a way to recognize an article which “meets a core set of editorial standards but is not featured article quality.” An article is assessed against 6 criteria to see if it is well written, verifiable, broad in its coverage, neutral, stable, and appropriately illustrated. The review process is sometimes called “lightweight” as a single reviewer is able to go through the evaluation process with the nominating editor.
 * Abstract:

How does this actually play out? In many ways incredibly well. The GA process is one of the few ways an editor can get detailed substantive feedback on the quality of their article work. Reviews typically take only a few days from start to finish. Pass or fail, the GA process frequently works to keep editors engaged and motivated in the core work of content creation while raising the overall quality of the encyclopedia. A review can be collaborative work at its finest.

However, there are also issues. The biggest issues with the Good Articles process is the long waiting list with about 400 articles waiting for reviews at the time this is being submitted. This presentation will explore six months of data collected on nominations and reviews to shed light on where the process is working and where it can use more help and what factors do and don’t influence the average wait time for an article.

Probably the best way the backlog of nominees can be reduced is by having more reviewers and so this presentation will end with a brief overview of of the review instructions and pointing to resources where interested editors can learn more about the process. The Good Article community review process will also be explored as a possible entry point for editors who wish to do work with Good Articles.


 * Length of presentation: roughly 20-25 minutes


 * Special requests:


 * Preferred room size: 10? 20?


 * Have you presented on this topic previously? If yes, where/when?: Not previously presented


 * If you will be incorporating a slidedeck during your presentation, do you agree to upload it to Commons before your session, with a CC-BY-SA 4.0 license, including suitable attribution in the slidedeck for any images used?: Yes I agree


 * Will you attend WikiConference North America if your submission is not accepted?: Maybe

Interested attendees
'''If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. ( ~ ).'''


 * 1)   Nova Crystallis   (Talk)  04:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 2) L235 (talk) 04:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 3) Enterprisey (talk) 04:16, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 4)  Sounder  Bruce  06:15, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 5) RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 6) Another Believer (talk) 14:54, 9 October 2018 (UTC)