User:Uncle G/Wikipedia triage

This is currently only in note form. I still need to expand the notes into complete paragraphs.

Wikipedia new page triage is a recommended procedure for when one is performing "new page patrol", fielding new pages as they appear on the list at Special:newpages. To follow it, one proceeds as follows:

Check whether a new page is a candidate for speedy deletion.
Check whether a new page is a copyright problem.
Check whether a new page is a duplicate of an existing article.
Check whether a new page is a candidate for normal deletion.
Hand the article off to the next stage in the production line.

Checking for the possibility of speedy deletion

The first step in Wikipedia new page triage is to check whether a new page is a candidate for speedy deletion. If it is, place the appropriate speedy deletion notice on it, and you're done.

Bear the following points in mind:

Don't become slap happy. The criteria for speedy deletion are deliberately narrow. Don't attempt to extend their boundaries with creative interpretations. If an article does not fall within the boundaries, it is meant to go through the normal deletion process.
- One very common error is to expand the patent nonsense criteria to encompass all nonsense, and thence to encompass articles that do make sense, but are simply written in fractured English or are unwikified. Articles that make sense, no matter how badly written they may be and no matter how incorrect they may be, are not nonsense. They are candidates for cleanup. Furthermore, articles that are nonsense are not necessarily patent nonsense. Remember the maxim: Patent nonsense is nonsense that you couldn't understand, not merely that you don't understand.
Be specific. Avoid the use of {{d}} and {{delete}}. They force an administrator on "speedy delete patrol" to have to second guess which speedy deletion criterion you thought applied. Use {{db}} or {{deletebecause}} and explicitly specify by number which criterion you think applies. (For example: {{deletebecause|CSD #G3:Silly vandalism}}.) Note that for two speedy deletion criteria there are specific speedy deletion templates: {{nonsense}} and {{deleteagain}}.
Be careful. It has been known for the article creation process to become "stuck", because people don't check the contents before marking an article for speedy deletion under CSD criterion #5 (i.e. reposted content that was deleted according to deletion policy), and perfectly legitmate articles become speedily deleted simply because there was a prior history of deletable articles by the same title. Fighting hair-trigger {{deleteagain}}-applicators can be especially dis-spiriting to well-intentioned novices.

Checking for the possibility of copyright violation

The second step in Wikipedia new page triage is to check whether a new page is a copyright problem. If it is, place the {{copyvio}} notice on it, list it at WP:CP, and you're done.

Companies and organisations that wish to advertise themselves, their products, or their beliefs have long since learned that, because of its dense cross-linking and its mirrors, Wikipedia is a convenient means for avoiding having to pay Google for placed advertisements. Single line advertisements containing hyperlinks to an external web site, or a reference to a book, should not have reached this stage of Wikipedia triage, since they are eligible for speedy deletion under CSD criterion #9. However, sly companies avoid this by copying and pasting biographes, corporate descriptions, mission statements, or press releases into articles.

Wikipedia:copyright problems is Wikipedia's weapon against those who would turn it from an enclopædia into a free advertising billboard. A corporate description, copied and pasted from an "about" web page, can be removed entirely and replaced with {{copyvio}} indicating the location of the corporate web page. The beauty of the weapon is that companies are loathe to license their own web content under the GFDL. Rare indeed is the corporate mission statement page, biography, advertisement, or press release that is not copyrighted and restrictively licensed. Companies are thus effectively barred from placing their advertisements on Wikipedia by their own legal departments. Think of it as Copyright Judo if you like.

For best results:

In order to completely counter the attempt at Googlebombing, place a <nowiki>...</nowiki> around the URL of the web page, to prevent the web spiders from seeing a hyperlink from Wikipedia (and its mirrors) to the corporate site. e.g. {{copyvio|url=<nowiki>http://example.com./about.html</nowiki>}}
Always remember that the {{copyvio}} template replaces the violating text. It is not meant to be placed alongside of it.

Always check for copyright violation before checking for normal deletion criteria. With the normal deletion process, an advertisement stays in place for at least 5 days, sometimes a lot longer if discussion is prolonged. With the copyright violation process, the advertisement is removed immediately, and replaced with a notice.

Checking for the possibility of article duplication

The third step in Wikipedia new page triage is to check whether a new page is a duplicate article. If it is, merge it, redirect it, or begin merging it.

As you are no doubt aware, Wikipedia's search form is somewhat idiosyncratic. It doesn't operate like the site search facilities at most other web sites on the world wide web. The default action, when one presses return, is not to search. The default action is to pull up the exactly matching (case, punctuation, whitespace, and all) article.

Unfortunately, many a new page has appeared because a Wikipedia novice has come along, entered a search term into the search entryfield, pressed return expecting it to perform a search like it does on most other web site, seen the resultant "Wikipedia has no article by this title but you can help Wikipedia by creating it" page, and helpfully decided to do just that, presuming that Wikipedia is missing the article.

The most common indicators of this sort of occurrence are:

Article titles that are enclosed by quotation marks, such as "Minnesota Railroads". This is usually the result of a novice who expects Wikipedia's search facility to operate as Google's does.
Article titles where every word is capitalised even though the title is not a proper noun, such as Worm Gear.
Article titles that are obviously incorrectly capitalized, such as WILLIAM MCBRIDE, maria irene fornes, CARL WOOD, or Leopold LUMMERSTORFER.

Checking for the possibility of normal deletion

The fourth step in Wikipedia triage is to check whether a new page is a candidate for normal deletion.

band vanity "your competitors" Hewlett Packard Criteria from project Music web-log vanity autobiography

Normal deletion is not Cleanup.
Normal deletion is not Merge.

Handing the page off to the next stage in the production line

The fifth step in Wikipedia new page triage is to hand the article off to the next stage in the production line.

The process of improving articles often operates much like a production line, with different editors performing different tasks. For example:

Editor A creates the initial page
Editor B, on "new page patrol", places the appropriate cleanup and stub tags on it
Editor C, on "cleanup patrol", applies cleanup
Editor D, on "stub patrol", adds categories, "see also" section entries, and whatnot

{{wikify}} - emphasise the title.

It's what is normally forgotten.
It provides an example of wikification to novices.

Change {{stub}} to a more specific {{x-stub}}. Editors are more likely to patrol specific stub categories than they are to patrol Category:Stubs.

Add {{cleanup-x}} - copyedit and tone

Wikify/copyedit yourself.

Don't be ashamed of doing a little. It's better than doing nothing at all.