Wikipedia talk:Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/December 2013
 |
Quickfails
editThe "Totals" sections says "All reviews will be worth 1 point with the exception of Quick-fails which will not be counted." But several reviewers do seem to be listing quickfails, and these have been checked as valid. (They may not say quickfail, but if they are failed immediately without giving the nominator a chance to fix the problems, aren't those quickfails?) – Quadell (talk) 23:13, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- OMG, I was half asleep when I checked those....fixing now.--Dom497 (talk) 23:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! (Of course, we're all grateful for appropriate quickfails. But they are a lot easier.) – Quadell (talk) 15:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Definition of "insufficient review"
editI see that "Users who are found to have 5 or more insufficient reviews will be disqualified." What is an insufficient review? One that is checked by a reviewer and then marked with a red X? AmericanLemming (talk) 19:29, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think appropriate quickfails should count as insufficient reviews, even if they also shouldn't count as full reviews. I would say an insufficient review is one where the reviewer has clearly not done his or her job, and has either passed a nominee where the criteria have clearly not been met, or failed a nominee when doing so was manifestly inappropriate. But that's just my opinion. – Quadell (talk) 19:39, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with you there. I'm guessing Dom497's intention with marking reviews with red X's is to keep people from using quick fails to inflate their totals, though I'm not sure on that. AmericanLemming (talk) 05:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- @AmericanLemming: The purpose is not to discourage quickfails but simply to say you can quickfail if you want/is appropriate, it just doesn't count. For the sake and purpose of the drive, quick fails don't really count as full reviews so that is why they don't count.--Dom497 (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- In summary, appropriate quick fails aren't considered "insufficient reviews" but they also don't count toward your review total, right? AmericanLemming (talk) 21:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yup!--Dom497 (talk) 21:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- In summary, appropriate quick fails aren't considered "insufficient reviews" but they also don't count toward your review total, right? AmericanLemming (talk) 21:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- @AmericanLemming: The purpose is not to discourage quickfails but simply to say you can quickfail if you want/is appropriate, it just doesn't count. For the sake and purpose of the drive, quick fails don't really count as full reviews so that is why they don't count.--Dom497 (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with you there. I'm guessing Dom497's intention with marking reviews with red X's is to keep people from using quick fails to inflate their totals, though I'm not sure on that. AmericanLemming (talk) 05:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Pledges
edit@Edge3, J Milburn, and MusikAnimal: Thanks you 3 for making pleges! The final donation amount is $20.88 (USD). For just reviewing articles, I'll say its pretty good. Edge3, your donation amount is $5.80, J Milburn, your donation amount is $3.48, and MusikAnimal, your donation amount is $11.60. Thanks again!--Dom497 (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- I just submitted my donation. I'm not sure whether you need confirmation; I can provide the donation number from the WMF if needed. Thanks for organizing this! Edge3 (talk) 02:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- Same here. Thanks Dom! — MusikAnimal talk 15:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- I don't need conformation. I trust that we will all be honest to each other. :) --Dom497 (talk) 19:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- Same here. Thanks Dom! — MusikAnimal talk 15:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)