Wikipedia talk:Peer review/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Edit notice

I have reverted people adding peer reviewes to the WP:PR page twice in the past 10 days or so (and it happens several times a year, on average). In an effort to avoid this, I made Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Peer review - any tweaks or feedback is welcome. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:47, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Question

Noticing the whole backlog issue above, i'm dropping my question on the 14 day rule, because it's clear you guys need less peer review nominations, not more. Instead, would it be better for me to personally contact reviewers from the list (excluding the top peer reviewers noted just above, they can use some rest, i'm sure) and have them raise things on the talk page of an article, as an alternative to a peer review? I just need some comments on how to make sure the recently Good Article approved article meets the FA criteria, before nominating it for FA. Silverseren^C 18:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry not to have replied sooner. A talk page review would be fine, but I would just go ahead and nominate for a PR - it is easier for people to find it that way (talk page comments often get lost in archives. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Then I will have to bring up the 14 day rule issue. The PR review was closed just a few days ago and then I nominated it for GA. Luckily, it was picked up almost immediately and passed within a day. So the issue is that it has not been even close to 14 days since the peer review was closed, so opening a new one would violate the 14 day rule. However, I guess I should note that the new one would be focusing on specific things, namely the FA criteria, which were not a focus in the prior PR, because that was aimed at getting the article to GA status. Silverseren^C 17:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

What is the article in question? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Cracker Barrel Old Country Store. There's currently a heated discussion going on on the talk page about one of the subsections, but that should hopefully be cleared up soon. Silverseren^C 22:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

WIth the backlog it will likely be 14 days before it is reviewed anyway, so I would say go ahead and open a PR. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

An "oops" moment...

I accidentally nominated two articles for peer review within the 14-day period, after the new rule was in place. The second has received no feedback, and I'm wondering if it could be withdrawn. dci | TALK 00:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure - do you want me to delete it (please say which one you want withdrawn). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Invasions of the British Isles. dci | TALK 07:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

OK - the alternative would be to archive the PR for Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor as I see it has received quite a few comments. The 14 day wait is for re-lisiting the same article at PR (so Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor would have to wait 2 weeks after closing to be listed here again, but any other article you want could be listed here once the PR for Francis closed). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:55, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, if you haven't deleted the Invasions of the British Isles one, you could go ahead and archive the Francis II PR. Thanks!dci | TALK 18:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Francis II is archived and I never deleted the British Invasion (wasn't that the Beatles?) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:32, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

List of Malmö FF seasons

The review of this has messed up the remainder of the PR page. I don't know why, nor can I fix it, but perhaps someone can. Brianboulton (talk) 00:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I think that Cliftonian fixed the problem with this edit diff adding nowiki codes to some sample table entries. In any case, I do not see any problems with the display of the overall PR page now, and the Malmo FF PR does not have any of the common errors that mess up translcusion. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:25, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Deleting a pr with no comments

I would like to know if it's ok or possible if I choose not to want a PR (since I feel I don't want to work on that article at this time) and have someone delete its PR page? Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 00:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, which PR is it? I can delete it. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:01, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Help required @ WP:India

An assessment drive has been suggested to clear a backlog of more than 18,000 unassessed articles on WP:India. Reviewers can volunteer here. Cheers, Around The Globe^{सत्यमेव जयते} 10:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)