I've been browsing CSD for a few days and I've noticed that every time I look at CSD it takes at least 40 minutes until an article is deleted. Granted I look in the afternoon, but it's sorta bad if an article stays on Wikipedia for more than 10 minutes if it shouldn't be... maybe we should do something about that.
I thought we had over 1000 admins. Granted CSD is a task not many should do, but shouldn't we make a system so that there's an "admin on duty" or an easier way to see what admins are online to help?
Either that or have me pass RFA so I can help ;-) (no i'm not running right now)
--Chris is me
I've done some CSD a while back and I noticed how after I got rid of 10 pages, another 20 were added. It's like mopping with the water running and the fact there's so much mistagging going on doesn't make it a particular speedy process as it was supposed to be.
Mgm
On 5/17/07, Chris Picone wikichris@gmail.com wrote:
I've been browsing CSD for a few days and I've noticed that every time I look at CSD it takes at least 40 minutes until an article is deleted. Granted I look in the afternoon, but it's sorta bad if an article stays on Wikipedia for more than 10 minutes if it shouldn't be... maybe we should do something about that.
I thought we had over 1000 admins. Granted CSD is a task not many should do, but shouldn't we make a system so that there's an "admin on duty" or an easier way to see what admins are online to help?
Either that or have me pass RFA so I can help ;-) (no i'm not running right now)
--Chris is me _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Thu, 17 May 2007 20:15:05 +0200, "MacGyverMagic/Mgm" macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
I've done some CSD a while back and I noticed how after I got rid of 10 pages, another 20 were added. It's like mopping with the water running and the fact there's so much mistagging going on doesn't make it a particular speedy process as it was supposed to be.
Absolutely. And the twenty-minute argument with Jeff every third article doesn't help. If only we could get him to work on educating the newpage patrollers instead of trying to educate us...
Guy (JzG)
On 5/17/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Thu, 17 May 2007 20:15:05 +0200, "MacGyverMagic/Mgm" macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
I've done some CSD a while back and I noticed how after I got rid of 10 pages, another 20 were added. It's like mopping with the water running and the fact there's so much mistagging going on doesn't make it a particular speedy process as it was supposed to be.
Absolutely. And the twenty-minute argument with Jeff every third article doesn't help. If only we could get him to work on educating the newpage patrollers instead of trying to educate us...
Guy (JzG)
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
If you're arguing, it probably isn't a speedy candidate. ~~~~
On Thu, 17 May 2007 17:02:00 -0400, "Gabe Johnson" gjzilla@gmail.com wrote:
If you're arguing, it probably isn't a speedy candidate.
This is Jeff we're talking about. As far as he's concerned, having two arms two legs and a head is an assertion of notability. Well, maybe not quite, but he is well off in the long tail of the inclusionist spectrum.
This has the result that his genuinely sound requests get lost with the dross.
Guy (JzG)
Chris Picone wrote:
I've been browsing CSD for a few days and I've noticed that every time I look at CSD it takes at least 40 minutes until an article is deleted. Granted I look in the afternoon, but it's sorta bad if an article stays on Wikipedia for more than 10 minutes if it shouldn't be... maybe we should do something about that.
I thought we had over 1000 admins. Granted CSD is a task not many should do, but shouldn't we make a system so that there's an "admin on duty" or an easier way to see what admins are online to help?
Either that or have me pass RFA so I can help ;-) (no i'm not running right now)
--Chris is me _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Aside from attack articles, a CSD backlog is not serious, and it is cleared regularly. 40 min is quite acceptable - indeed a day or two wouldn't concern me.
We've backlogs that have been sitting for months, and don't need the admin tools to deal with - if you are keen to help, start there.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_backlog
Indeed the admin related backlogs are the least of our concerns.
Thanks. I've also been clearing out mistagged CSDs... maybe we should call on regular users like me to do that too?
On 5/17/07, doc doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
Chris Picone wrote:
I've been browsing CSD for a few days and I've noticed that every time I look at CSD it takes at least 40 minutes until an article is deleted. Granted I look in the afternoon, but it's sorta bad if an article stays
on
Wikipedia for more than 10 minutes if it shouldn't be... maybe we should
do
something about that.
I thought we had over 1000 admins. Granted CSD is a task not many should
do,
but shouldn't we make a system so that there's an "admin on duty" or an easier way to see what admins are online to help?
Either that or have me pass RFA so I can help ;-) (no i'm not running
right
now)
--Chris is me _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Aside from attack articles, a CSD backlog is not serious, and it is cleared regularly. 40 min is quite acceptable - indeed a day or two wouldn't concern me.
We've backlogs that have been sitting for months, and don't need the admin tools to deal with - if you are keen to help, start there.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_backlog
Indeed the admin related backlogs are the least of our concerns.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I too think 40 min is pretty good, as I'm one of the newly added admins who are working on it. The real junk gets deleted very fast--the ones with some potential difficulty sometimes stay a few hours or overnight until someone with more experience takes the responsibility.
Remember that it is not enough to delete the junk--if the author hasn't been warned properly (about half the time) he needs to be, so he doesn't come back for more. --DGG
On 5/17/07, doc doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
Chris Picone wrote:
I've been browsing CSD for a few days and I've noticed that every time I look at CSD it takes at least 40 minutes until an article is deleted. Granted I look in the afternoon, but it's sorta bad if an article stays on Wikipedia for more than 10 minutes if it shouldn't be... maybe we should do something about that.
I thought we had over 1000 admins. Granted CSD is a task not many should do, but shouldn't we make a system so that there's an "admin on duty" or an easier way to see what admins are online to help?
Either that or have me pass RFA so I can help ;-) (no i'm not running right now)
--Chris is me _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Aside from attack articles, a CSD backlog is not serious, and it is cleared regularly. 40 min is quite acceptable - indeed a day or two wouldn't concern me.
We've backlogs that have been sitting for months, and don't need the admin tools to deal with - if you are keen to help, start there.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_backlog
Indeed the admin related backlogs are the least of our concerns.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 17/05/07, doc doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
We've backlogs that have been sitting for months, and don't need the admin tools to deal with - if you are keen to help, start there.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_backlog
Indeed the admin related backlogs are the least of our concerns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Category_tracker is also quite useful.
As a positive note, when I first started watching that page, requested moves was routinely around 200. Now it's routinely around 50. Some backlogs do get beaten...
I don't think CSD has a backlog at all. The tag should probably be removed. A large number of articles in the category doesn't make it backlogged, it just makes it busy. There are lots of articles there because lots of articles are being tagged - just as many as being untagged and deleted.
I do encourage admins to spend a few minutes helping out - sometimes you see something that makes your day. I just deleted an article about an independent record label. The author had added a {{hangon}} tag and explained on the talk page that:
"My page shound not be deleted because i need it to avertise my new record label." (sic)
Probably the easiest decision I've made on a CSD. (barring db-author's, I guess)
I went on some "CSD patrol" last night, and was quite shocked at the abuse of certain tags - G11 (spam) being the most mistreated, with A7 not far behind. Perhaps the CSDs need tightening up, or we need to provide more specific instructions to the tagging editors (perhaps some message templates wheich an admin can quickly whack onto the user's talk page...).
Martin
On 18/05/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think CSD has a backlog at all. The tag should probably be removed. A large number of articles in the category doesn't make it backlogged, it just makes it busy. There are lots of articles there because lots of articles are being tagged - just as many as being untagged and deleted.
I do encourage admins to spend a few minutes helping out - sometimes you see something that makes your day. I just deleted an article about an independent record label. The author had added a {{hangon}} tag and explained on the talk page that:
"My page shound not be deleted because i need it to avertise my new record label." (sic)
Probably the easiest decision I've made on a CSD. (barring db-author's, I guess)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 5/18/07, Chris Picone wikichris@gmail.com wrote:
I've been browsing CSD for a few days and I've noticed that every time I look at CSD it takes at least 40 minutes until an article is deleted. Granted I look in the afternoon, but it's sorta bad if an article stays on Wikipedia for more than 10 minutes if it shouldn't be... maybe we should do something about that.
As I've said before, there wouldn't be such a backlog if people wouldn't tag so much stuff for deletion.
Seriously though, non-admins can help too, by going through the candidates and checking whether they really are eligible for speedy deletion or whether the tagger was just too lazy to send it to articles for deletion or use proposed deletion.
On 5/18/07, Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com wrote:
Seriously though, non-admins can help too, by going through the candidates and checking whether they really are eligible for speedy deletion or whether the tagger was just too lazy to send it to articles for deletion or use proposed deletion.
If you really think the people you refer to are just "lazy", you've probably made an excessively broad assumption of both good faith, and competence.
Next time you see an RFA candidate with 25,000 edits, 4,000 of which are CSD or {{prod}} tags which have been declined (otherwise, after all, they wouldn't be visible in user's contribs), I doubt "lazy" will be the first word coming to mind.
—C.W.
On 5/19/07, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/18/07, Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com wrote:
Seriously though, non-admins can help too, by going through the candidates and checking whether they really are eligible for speedy deletion or whether the tagger was just too lazy to send it to articles for deletion or use proposed deletion.
If you really think the people you refer to are just "lazy", you've probably made an excessively broad assumption of both good faith, and competence.
Next time you see an RFA candidate with 25,000 edits, 4,000 of which are CSD or {{prod}} tags which have been declined (otherwise, after all, they wouldn't be visible in user's contribs), I doubt "lazy" will be the first word coming to mind.
If an editor can tag 4,000 articles but can't even bother to, for example, check the article history or what links here, then that editor is lazy and irresponsible. Let's not mince words.
Johnleemk
On 19/05/07, Charlotte Webb charlottethewebb@gmail.com wrote:
Next time you see an RFA candidate with 25,000 edits, 4,000 of which are CSD or {{prod}} tags which have been declined (otherwise, after all, they wouldn't be visible in user's contribs), I doubt "lazy" will be the first word coming to mind.
No, [[goldfarming]] is the first word that springs to mind.
- d.
On 5/19/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
No, [[goldfarming]] is the first word that springs to mind.
More like [[not fucking getting it]].
—C.W.