User:FormalDude/Mentorship/Itcouldbepossible/AfC school

Syllabus[edit]

Notability

Wikipedia policy and guidelines

Assume good faith
Conflicts of interest (including undisclosed paid editing)
Hoaxes and attack pages

Communications

Discussions with creators of new drafts
- Automated notifications and when to manually notify/discuss
- Tone, clarity, and knowledge in discussions
- Wikilove/positive comments
Warning templates

Deletion

Speedy Deletion

Reviewing Procedures

Improvement Tagging
Scripts for reviewing use/ease

Passing Criteria

AfC reviewers must have:

a Wikipedia account at least 90 days old.
a minimum of 500 undeleted edits to articles (this is not the same as total number of edits).
thoroughly read and understood the reviewing instructions.
a demonstrated understanding of the policies and guidelines mentioned in the reviewing instructions, including the various notability guidelines.
reasonable evidence of understanding the CSD policy (experience in areas such as AfD/PROD or page curation, while not mandatory, are beneficial).
a willingness and ability to respond in a timely manner to questions about their reviews.

The successful AfC School Graduate will be able to:

Accurately identify when a draft has satisfied GNG
Accurately evaluate drafts against specific SNG criteria
Find and accurately apply common Wikipedia practices when evaluating notability
Differentiate between spam, vandalism, nonsense, and foreign language drafts
Engage in appropriate and useful conversations with other editors about AfC
Know when and how to appropriately nominate a draft for speedy deletion
Understand AfC procedures and norms

Notes[edit]

Please respond here once you have read the syllabus and all the wikilinked pages. Let me know if you have any questions about the content. ––FormalDude talk 06:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
FormalDude Hi, I have finished reading the syllabus. What is to be done now? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 03:52, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Notability[edit]

PART 1

Questions[edit]

Question 1

In your own words, how is notability defined on Wikipedia?

Answer: Notability on Wikipedia is a set of criterion that is used to determine if a topic or article is notable to have an independent article or not. If notability fails for a given subject, then the subject clearly cannot have a separate article for it, since Wikipedia is not indiscriminate collection of information.

Y Correct.

Question 2

Would step by step instructions on "How to change a car tire" be considered a notable topic in Wikipedia? Why or why not?

Answer: First of all, even if we disregard the Notability policy, then also the subject won't be notable atleast for Wikipedia. First of all, I don't know which policy says it, but Wikipedia is not a how-to-guide for doing a specific job. Secondly, the first point in WP:NOTGUIDE clarifies my answer. If we talk in terms of Notability, then I don't know which criteria can be used to determine if it is notable or not. But if I see an article like this while patrolling articles, then I will surely AFD it on the basis that Wikipedia is not a guide.

Y Correct.

Question 3

What are the differences between the WP:GNG and the subject-specific notability guidelines (SNG)? How do we determine which one to use when patrolling an article?

Answer: Well, according to me, WP:GNG as it says, General Notability Guidelines, it is a general set of rules to determine notability. 'General' means that it can be applied for everything regardless the topic. While WP:SNG means Subject-specific notability guidelines, it means notability guidelines have been made specially for certain topics to determine if they are notable or not. Basically it is just an addon to the GNG but a more prominent set of rules for a particular subject. GNG and SNG in real life is like for example, if I say, Children are nowadays more addicted to gadgets than books - this is a general statement regarding children with no specific mention. Now if I say, George, the 4th Grade child like playing with gadgets so much that he sometimes forgets to eat - this is a specific statement regarding a specific child who loves playing with gadgets with some additional information. The previous statement was a general statement for all kids, while the latter was more specific. So GNG and SNG is like this only. GNG is a general set of rules of Notability, while SNG is a more detailed set of rules for specific subjects. Sometimes SNGs also state the type of sources to be used, and also at times tells us when a specific article cannot be used.

Well basically if it is for me, then I would start with GNG first and determine if it passes the basic guidelines at all. So that is the first level. It can go either way. If it fails then either CSD or AFD (or PROD; it depends), and if it passes GNG, then I go forward to check if the article meets its SNG guidelines as well. For example, consider an article about an actress. She has significantly been covered by multiple sources, the sources are reliable, verifiable and can be trusted upon. It has been written neutrally but it doesn't pass WP:NACTOR, she is famous or well known because of reasons, but she hasn't performed in notable shows, or her role might have been weak or just a simple character in a non - notable show. So there goes the article. We can tag as notability problem for sometime, discuss with the creator on him / her talk page or on the article talk page itself. Then finally if nothing can be done to improve the article, a WP:BEFORE search, and then straight to AFD for discussion. This is the method that I primarily want to use. Please comment on it stating if it is right or it has to be improved.

Y Correct. For clarification, if an article meets either GNG or an SNG, it passes Wikipedia's notability criteria. It does not have to meet both. So for example, if the actress article had sources that met GNG, it wouldn't matter that the article didn't meet WP:NACTOR.

Question 4

Virtually all SNGs that provide additional notability criteria specify that these criteria may indicate that the subject meets notability guidelines. How would you interpret this caveat as a new page reviewer?

Answer: It means that even if the article meets SNG it still might not to be notable.

Y Correct.

PART 2

Scenarios[edit]

For scenarios 1-6 review just based on "subject notability guidelines" (SNG) "alone" for sake of the exercise. Do not consider any sources or other policies. Please answer if the subject meets the SNG guidelines based on the given content below, and specify which notability criteria they meet or fail.

For scenarios 7-11 specify which SNGs would establish the subject's notability.

Scenario 1

An editor creates an article about "2028 Summer Olympics" without providing any sources.

Answer: Summer Olympics is considered to be an event. If we consider the first criteria in WP:EVENTCRIT then it says, Events are probably notable if they have enduring historical significance and meet the general notability guideline, or if they have a significant lasting effect. So, at the very beginning the article goes for deletion as it doesn't meet WP:GNG as stated in the guidelines, as in GNG it is stated that it should have sources that are reliable and verifiable. If there are no sources, then GNG doesn't satisfy, thus EVENTCRIT also in that way cannot be fulfilled.

Y Correct. It doesn't meet WP:EVENTCRIT because it is too far in the future, and it doesn't meet GNG because there are no sources.

Scenario 2

A New York city based 2020 start up software company, specializing in data mining, has just received a USD 200K investor fund.

Answer: If it doesn't have any sources, then it doesn't meet WP:ORGCRIT, and it has sources, then it should have significant coverage that are independent of the subject, and should have substantial coverage, and not just a trivial mention.

Y Correct.

Scenario 3

Guram Kutateladze who is a Ultimate Fighting Championships fighters with the undefeated mixed martial arts record of 12-2.

Answer: Well, again in this case, the subject should have sgnificant coverage, that is, multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject as said in WP:SPORTCRIT. Additionally, if he has done 'great fighting', then he would be "worthy of notice", and wold be notable under WP:ANYBIO.

Incorrect: The applicable SNG would be WP:MMABIO. Please specify which of the criteria from WP:MMABIO the article would pass or fail.

Ok, I should have been careful. After thoroughly reading WP:MMABIO and considering all that was written, I think the subject fails the whole SNG. He doesn't fulfil any of the criteria there to be considered notable. Firstly, he has not fought atleast 3 professional fights for a top-tier MMA organization, such as the UFC (he has fought only 1 as per what is available on the Sherdog website). He has also not fought the highest title of a top-tier MMA organization, and he is neither listed in the world top 10 of the lightweight division (that is what he specializes in) on the Sherdog website, and nor on the Fight Matrix website So, on whole he fails the whole criteria.

Y Correct.

Scenario 4

An upcoming action drama title "Suleiman the Great" based on the the life of Suleiman the Magnificent, which will be in production in December 2022 and to be released on August 2023 in the cinemas.

Answer: I don't think it will be notable, first because, if we think practically, it will lack sources, as no news would be published about a film so early. It will be in production in 2022, thats a long way. News publishers won't know the news so early. And even if no sources state that the shooting or principle photography has started, it should not have an article, as per WP:NFF because many things change during shooting and post production. So it clearly won't be notable for an article. It should at least for another 6 months or so.

Y Correct.

Scenario 5

A political candidates, without any previous or current political position, who is running for November 2020 election for a Senator position in United States with multiple local newspapers coverage of his candidacy.

Answer: Ah, it is tricky to determine if the subject is notable. If it the subject has been covered by 'multiple local newspapers' then I think it meets the second point in WP:POLITICIAN.

OR

It can be taken in another way. We can say that a political candidate cannot have an article before he is in some kind of position, and when sources are there just to state his candidacy. Then, miraculously, the article fails the first point in WP:POLITICIAN, notability guideline which was used to suggest notability in my first answer.

Y Correct. It depends on the extent of the coverage of his candidacy.

Scenario 6

A singer who self produced his first album in May 2019 and his songs are listed in Spotify.

Answer: Well, just having songs listed in Spotify, would not necessarily mean that he is notable, atleast on Wikipedia. He should be popular among critics as well. And must have multiple albums both of his own, and also songs that was written by someone else, but sung by himself. And the most important thing is coverage by reliable sources. If that criteria is satisfied, then he is notable. In short he should meet WP:BAND to be considered notable.

Y Correct.

Scenario 7

Carlos Alós-Ferrer

Answer: WP:NACADEMIC would be the suitable SNG for the subject.

Y Correct.

Scenario 8

Alistair Overeem

Answer: The subject would be notable under the WP:NKICK and WP:NMMA SNG guidelines.

Y Correct.

Scenario 9

Jennifer Lopez

Answer: The subject meets WP:NACTOR.

Y Correct.

Scenario 10

Three Mile Island accident

Answer: Would be notable under WP:LASTING and WP:DEPTH.

Y Correct. Wikipedia:Notability (events)

Scenario 11

Persepolis

Answer: Would be notable under WP:GEOFEAT.

Y Correct.

Communication[edit]

@Itcouldbepossible: Please complete the above assignment and let me know if you have any questions. ––FormalDude talk 04:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude Hi, could you please explain what I have to do from scenario 7. I could not get your instructions well. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:43, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible: Yes, you list the WP:SNG that applies to the article. So for example, if the question was for the article Hillary Clinton, the correct SNG would be WP:NPOL. (Because she is a politician, and NPOL is the SNG for politicians.)––FormalDude talk 06:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Thanks for clarifying your point. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 12:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Hi FormalDude. I have finished the assignment that you had given me. I know it took me long, but I was really busy to manage time to edit. How are my answers? Are you satisfied with these? How are we going to procced next?Itcouldbepossible^Talk 07:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Itcouldbepossible: I've graded the assignment, please see my responses and let me know if you have any questions before we move on. ––FormalDude talk 08:50, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  - @FormalDude: Thanks a lot for grading my assignment. I hoped I would get all correct, but alas, it was a negligency from my part in reading the SNGs correctly. I don't have any questions till this point, as all seems crystal clear to me. Additionally, I have answered Scenario 3 correctly. Can you comment on it too? If you think I am ready to continue, then I would want to proceed further, to the next step. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 09:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Sources[edit]

Background[edit]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. As such, claims made in articles should be supported by independent (secondary), reliable sources for verification. Please read WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:RSP, WP:V, WP:PROVEIT, WP:Primary, WP:Secondary, and WP:Tertiary. WP:NPPSG may be a useful reference for looking up the reliability of a source that has been discussed before on Wikipedia.

You can contact WP:RX if you could not find the sources yourself either on the web due to paywalls or offline-only sources.

Exercises[edit]

Please fill in the blanks for the following three tables. Leave the trainer comment section blank, that is where I'll respond.

1.

Topic	Definition	5 Examples	Comment by Trainer
Reliable source	A source can be called 'reliable' when it has been published by a trustworthy publisher and written by someone non connected to the subject. Moreover, the source must be non-paid and must not promote the subject as can happen when the content has been sponsered by someone,because it is paid for by advertisers and bypasses the publication's editorial process. And the source should be independent from the subject as well, and it must be neutral, unbiased, or objective as per WP:BIASED, especially when the article is about politics and religion. So, to sum up, a source can be called a 'reliable source', when it is published by a reliable publisher, written in a neutral point of view, non promotional and non- paid and the source that is being used is not biased towards the said subject.	(example)The Guardian newspaper The Hindu BBC News The Times Anandabazar Patrika (not sure about this one though, but used in many TV article shows and in biographies of actors and actresses of the Bengali Film industry - in other words, Anandabazar can be called the main type of source that is used as in article about Bengali films, television shows, actors or models) The New York Times	Y Correct.
User generated sources	Well, this is quite simple. User generated sources are sources, which have been really 'generated' by a user. For example, I create a promotional article, and then to support it I create my own website and then write something about that particular subject there, and then I cite it to my promotional article calling it a source to support some content. Social media posts are also user generated. No one knows who I am in real life, so when I make post on social media, it cannot be called a reliable source, as it cannot be determined if I am a supporter of the subject and if through that post I am actually trying to promote the subject. So, a social media post is also a user generated source. Blog posts is also an example of user generated posts since users can either own blogs themselves, or might make a post about someone on someone else's blog. So all these are user generated sources.	Any post on any social media platform. (I am not naming separate social media sites, as I don't want to waste the space allotted for writing examples just by giving examples of the same type) A self made website. A blog post. (Unless it is verified by someone who can be trusted such as an experience journalist or someone else.) Videos available on Youtube. Self published book and vanity press issues.	Y Correct. A blog post made by an expert is still a self-published source, but can be acceptable in certain instances.
Non Independent source	Well, non independent sources are sources that are not 'independent' of the subject. It means, that the sources are in a way 'exist only to support a certain fact'. It may still seem unclear, so I am trying to be more clear. Non independent sources are sources which may have some some conflict of interest, or has some kind of bias, or the source has been created by someone who has any relation with the subject in question.	An autobiography is probably the best example of a non independent source. The author would always try to promote himself / herself. (I would always say good words about myself in my autobiography and try and tell how good I am.) Something found on a website, which has close relation with the subject. News published by certain press which are known for advertising. TV advertisements are at all times paid and made for commercial gain, and the company Social media posts.	Y Correct. It always depends on the content the source is supporting. For example, a White House press release is not independent for content about the U.S. government.

2.

Type	Definition	Examples (15 Primary ; 5 Secondary ; 5 Tertiary)	Comment by Trainer
Primary	Sources that are published by someone who is in close relation with the subject or the subject himself or herself.	(example) scientific journal articles reporting experimental research results Autobiography Social media posts Press releases. Pictures of someone. A Youtube video that is about the subject A manuscript Recordings Artifacts Survey data Information regarding a company from their own official website. Letters written by the subject to someone. Someone speaking about his / her Covid 19 experience who has experienced it himself / herself. Buranjis (historical chronicles of the Ahoms of India) Travelogues Someone talking about his / her own deeds Film reviews made by the producer or director of a specific film.	Y Correct. Example: Oprah's interview with Prince Harry and Megan Markle was a primary source on the Royal Family.
Secondary	Secondary sources are primarily based on primary sources, and it contains the publisher's analysis, interpretation or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources.	(example) newspaper Movie review by critics Biographies IMDb A book review Biographies	Y Correct. Secondary sources also include A book about a topic documentary, book reviews, scientific journals analyzing already existing data, etc.
Tertiary	Sources that have been derived or summarize facts from pre existing primary and secondary sources.	(example) encyclopedias Any type of Cookbook Encyclopædia Britannica Any manual The Bible Directories	Y Correct. Dictionaries and textbooks are also tertiary.

3.

Subject	Primary	Secondary	Tertiary	Comment by Trainer
Example: Art	Example:A photo of a sculpture	Example:An article in The New Yorker that reviews a new exhibit	Example:A museum catalog entry	Y Correct.
History	Diaries of someone in Holocaust	An article regarding lives of people during Holocaust	Encyclopedic article on the Holocaust like on Wikipedia, which comprises information both from primary and secondary sources.	Y Correct.
Science	A research paper of Max Planck	An article explaining what Max Planck meant to say in the research paper.	A Veritasium youtube video on that same topic as in the research paper, which was created using both the primary and secondary sources.	Y Correct.
Athletes	A football player speaking about how the game went.	Others' reviews on the game.	A Wikipedia article on that game consisting, the details about the game, what the players said about it, and what critiques said regarding the game.	Y Correct.

Communication[edit]

@Itcouldbepossible: Here's the next assignment, ping me here when you're ready to move on! ––FormalDude talk 12:23, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Thanks for the next assignment. I am fully ready to start doing it. When should I start it?Itcouldbepossible^Talk 14:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible: Feel free to start now. ––FormalDude talk 21:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude Hi, I have completed the given assignment. Can you please grade it? How were my answers? How do we proceed next? I am really excited about what is coming up next. This assignment was relatively simple. Will the next one be simple like this, or is it going to be difficult? Can you please tell me all about this? Best wishes, Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Itcouldbepossible: Give me some time to grade it and I'll post the next assignment and let you know. ––FormalDude talk 10:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  - @FormalDude: No problem. Please don't be hasty about it. You may take as much time as it best suits you. There is nothing to hurry about it. Hoping that you are in the best of health and spirits. Regards, Itcouldbepossible^Talk 15:39, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

CSD[edit]

In this assignment, we look at what type of articles need to be filtered out from our system when reviewing a page. There are many criteria of WP:Criteria for speedy deletion. Here we discuss General criteria (G1-G14), Article criteria (A1-A11) and R2.

Please do the following:

Bookmark Earwig's Copyvio Detector in your computer.
Install CV-revdel. After saving, you may have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache.

General criteria[edit]

1. Please review (G1-G14) at General and answer the following questions in your own words. When providing examples, be specific.

No	Criterion	Application	Example	Mentor comments
1	G1	This applies to articles that have incomprehensible english, or english that doesn't have any meaning even though it uses characters of the English Alphabet.	An article that is only made up of random strings of letters is probably the best example. For example, fajhsfkbasdfjadfkjabds fasdfadfa fasdfasdf hdfjsghdf kbgakfbs fdkhb sdfhbf dhabsd sih adba bdf dgsdg And so forth...	Y Correct.
2	G2	This is for test pages created to see how pages on Wikipedia work. They are mainly created by newcomers.	Hello! This is a test page. I am learning to create content on Wikipedia.	Y Correct.
3	G3	These include pages that have hoax content and misinform about someone or something. These also include redirects that are left behind as a result of a move that is a vandalized move.	Wikipedia is a place for mad people. I hate it. It should be blocked from the World Wide Web.	Y Correct.
4	G4	This simply applies to pages that have been recreated after a successful delete discussion with the same identical material as the previous article. But this doesn't apply to articles which are different from the previously deleted version, and also when the page is recreated after a proposed deletion, or when the article has been undeleted about a deletion review. It also includes AFDs' which has been closed as a soft delete.	Creating Aditi Chatterjee back with the same identical material, even when it was deleted as a result of a successful AFD nomination.	Y Correct.
5	G5	These include pages created by a banned or blocked user, violating their block. But these doesn't include pages that have been created by a blocked or banned user. It only includes pages that have been created after they have been blocked, and only when it has been proved that the author of the specified page is actually that banned or blocked user, who has come with a new account, and are thus violating their block. These mostly include creations by a sockpuppet, that is after their master account has been blocked, they create a new account, and they start editing again using it. Their page creations are to be deleted under the G5 criteria. It doesn't include pages that had been created before they were blocked or banned. It also applies for creations by a sockpuppet after their master account has been blocked, but not when it has been substantially edited by other established or uninvolved editors. This latter criterion is the most common criterion for the application of CSD G5.	A page that had been created by previous sockpuppets, and has been deleted multiple times. Again when the page turns up, with the same type of content, then it is sure to be the work of sockpuppets, and it should be CSD G5ed, along with other criteria if applicable.	Y Correct.
6	G6	These include all uncontroversial and technical deletions.	Deleting a redirect to move a page.	Y Correct.
7	G7	This is for a page that has been requested to be deleted by the author himself / herself and when the author is the only contributor.	Asking a subpage of my userpage to be deleted because I don't want it anymore.	Y Correct.
8	G8	These are for pages that are based on a page that didn't ever exist or has been since deleted.	Talk pages of deleted articles.
9	G9	These are for deletions made by the WMF office.	A highly vandalistic and hoaxed article about Jimbo Wales or Wikipedia.	Y Correct. Although that example is something the community would probably delete. WMF is typically only involved in exceptional circumstances such as legal problems.
10	G10	These are deletions made for pages that attack the subject of the page.	Prime Minister XXX raped my daughter Cathy while she was returning home from school.	Y Correct.
11	G11	These are for promotional pages and pages that are trying to advertise the subject.	An article promoting a specific actor or actress, that is clearly doesn't meet the notability guidelines for entertainers or even the basic notability criteria	Y Correct.
12	G12	These are for pages that have copyrighted material in them.	An article which has been wholly copied from simple.wikipedia.org and pasted to make another article here on the English Wikipedia to make another article.	Y Correct. Simple Wikipedia is freely licensed though so that actually wouldn't be a copyright violation.
13	G13	These are for abandoned drafts, that is, drafts that have not been edited in the last 6 months.	Any article listed here.	Y Correct.
14	G14	This criterion applies to disambiguation pages that are not actually needed. It also applies when a redirect ends with 'disambiguation' but does not necessarily disambiguate a page.	A disambiguation page that end in 'disambiguation', but disambiguates one page.	Y Correct.

Article and redirect criteria[edit]

1. Please review A1-A11, R2, and R3 criteria at WP:CSD#List of criteria and answer the following questions in your own words. When providing examples, be specific.

No	Criterion	Application	Example	Mentor comments
1	A1	Articles that have literally no context to identify the subject of the article fall in this criteria.	He loved the song, "We Wish You A Merry Christmas".	Y Correct.
2	A2	This applies to articles that are not written in English, but exist on another language of Wikipedia.	A copy of an article from the Chinese Wikipedia to the English Wikipedia with the Chinese alphabets in place.	Y Correct.
3	A3	This criterion can be applied to blank articles.	Any article which is blank or has 0 bytes of data.	Y Correct. Also included articles that only consist of external links, citations, or categories.
5	A5	This applies to articles that has been already been transwikied or has got imported to another Wikipedia language site.	Any article with the result that has been discussed at articles for deletion with an outcome to move it to another wiki.	Y Correct.
7	A7	This is for articles about people, bands, clubs, societies, groups, commercial and non commercial organizations, websites, animals and events, that cannot establish itself as important or claim its significance.	An article about an actor who is not notable at all, and also cannot be called important.	Y Correct.
9	A9	This applies to musical albums where the contributing artists doesn't have article themselves and also when it cannot be identified why the album or recording should be considered important. Another thing to note is that both criteria should be met for the article to be eligible for A9 deletion.	A musical album by Jhanishi Dalwich, Meganli Furtzwell and Chlodest De Von which has almost no mention about it on the Internet (except mere trivial once, like for example, X album has been released, listen now), and its importance cannot be determined.	Y Correct. Any article related to musical recordings that has no indication of importance.
10	A10	This is for recently created articles, that doesn't include more information than the existing article, and when the title is not suitable enough to make it into a redirect to the other article. It doesn't also include articles that have been split, or any article that adds more information that has well referenced and mergeable content. Also disambiguation pages are excluded from this criterion.	A duplicate article on Star Wars with the title Wars of Stars would fall in this criterion as Wars of Stars can never be redirected to Star Wars. If the title would have been Star Wars (TV Series) we would have redirected it to Star Wars (since it would be a proper redirect and useful redirect).	Y Correct.
11	A11	This is for articles whose subject has been invented by the author himself and there is no indication of importance.	An article about a type of car called "spacevel car" that can start from Earth and go through the atmosphere and even drive through space. It was made by Gimithrov Company Limited (a company no one has ever heard of) and will soon be released commercially.	Y Correct.
12	R2	These include cross-namespace redirects, that is redirects from the mainspace to any other namespace, but excluding redirects to the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces.	Best example is the redirects made when articles are draftified, that is when, articles are send to the draftspace from the mainspace.	Y Correct.
13	R3	These are for recently created redirects with improbable spelling mistakes.	A redirect from Vikipedia to Wikipedia	Y Correct.

Scenarios[edit]

Read each scenario and answer which CSD criteria(s) apply.

Scenario 1

A user with the username "BobSucks" creates an article called "John Smith" that contains solely the following text:

John Smith is the worst elementary school teacher on the planet.

A: I think this could be G3 or a G10 deletion.

Y Correct. G10.

Scenario 2

A user with the username "GoodTimesLLC" creates a user page with the following text

'''Good Times LLC''' is an organization dedicated to helping your children get the highest quality education at an affordable price. Visit our website at goodtimes.info and contact us at 123-456-7890.

A: This would most certainly be a G11 deletion, since from the tone of writing, it can be well understood that it is promoting the organization Good Times LLC.

Y Correct.

Scenario 3

A user creates an article titled "Edward Gordon" with the following text:

'''Edward Gordon''' (born July 1998) is an aspiring American actor and songwriter. So far, he has starred in many school plays and has published two albums on SoundCloud. He has over 500 subscribers on YouTube.

A: It could be a A7 deletion, since the subject cannot establish itself as important. Anyone can upload music at SoundCloud and only 500 subscribers on Youtube doesn't make anyone important. And acting in school plays is also not a big deal and isn't a way to establish oneself as important.

Incorrect: G11 self-promotion.

Scenario 4

A user creates an article titled "Bazz Ward" with the following content:

Bazz Ward was a Hall of Fame roadie and I wish he was as well known as Lemmy. Cheers Bazz.

A: Now this one is tricky. I cannot understand what all this is about. From the way it is written, I think it is just made for fun. There is no need to know what the author wanted to call 'Bazz Ward'. Could this be some kind of vandalism? If it is, then it should be a G3 deletion. I think, it could be a A1 deletion as it clearly has no context. It really doesn't convey anything. "Cheers Bazz" type of phrase can't be used in articles if it is not a hoax or something funny.

After searching on the internet for sometime, I find that this person was involved with some kind of bank called "The Nice". The band, it looks, is notable. So what if I made a redirect of this article to the band? Will that work? A redirect would probably stop the article from being deleted. Other than this I don't find a option. But if I would have been an admin, I would have deleted it on the grounds of A1 deletion criterion. The person might exist, but the way the article runs, makes it a kind of vandalism, or an article with no meaningful context.
Y Correct.

Scenario 5

A user creates an article Marks v. Shoup with the following content:

Under the law of Oregon which was in force in Alaska when the seizure and levy of the plaintiff's goods were made by the defendant as marshal of Alaska under a writ of attachment, that officer could not, by virtue of his writ, lawfully take the property from the possession of a third person, in whose possession he found it.

A: I think there is no problem with this article. What I gather from the internet is that has been derived from some kind of record by Justia Supreme Court, but has been reworded, so probably it shouldn't be a G12.

Incorrect: A1 as it is too vague.

Scenario 6

A user creates an article, but you can't understand any of it because it's in a foreign language.

A: First we need to see if the article is available in another language on any other wiki. If it is there, then the process is easy. We will tag it with CSD A2. If the article is not there, then we can do either of the following:

Go to Google Translate and paste the text to see if the article is a type of vandalism, hoax, or attacks to someone. We can also see if the user is trying to promote something or someone, just by using a different language. If either of them is true, then we will have to tag them with CSD accordingly. We can also find out if there is any kind of copyright problems. Then it is going for CSD G12.
If none of the above is applicable, then can tag it with the {{not english}} tag and that will list the article at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English.

Y Correct.

Scenario 7

A user creates an article, but shortly after creating it, the same user blanks the article by removing all of its content.

A: It is sure to be a G7 deletion.

Y Correct.

Scenario 8

A user creates an article which is an identical copy of another article on Wikipedia.

A: It depends on the title of the article. No one will be able to create two article with the same title. So the title has to be different from the other article. Now, if the title of the new article is suitable, then we can redirect it to the article from which it has been copied. Or it should be sent for A10 deletion if the title is such that, making a redirect would not be a good decision.

Y Correct.

Scenario 9

A user with the name "WikiRockers" creates the following article Phabricators are Fabulous is the debut single of an exciting new group called the WikiRockers. A: It can be a G11, since the user is named "WikiRockers" and they are calling them 'exciting new group', they are possibly trying to promote themselves. Also A9 can be applied since it is for music albums that cannot be considered important for inclusion as an article.

Y Correct.

Scenario 10

A user creates an article and 5 minutes after it was created the article only has a single category with no other text.

A: Umm, it could have gone for A3 if it would have been up for a while. But, I think 5 minutes is too short a time to send an article for CSD. We should possibly give some time to develop the article. At the most, we can bring up the issue on the talk page of the creator, explaining why it could be deleted if there is no further improvement and telling him to develop articles in the draftspace before moving it to mainspace, as the draftspace is a place where he where he will encounter the least interference.

Y Correct.

Scenario 11

An editor creates an article Larry Footy with the following wikisource (in other words it properly displays in the article):

{{Infobox football biography
 |name = Larry Footy
 |birth_place = [[Leeds, England]]
 |currentclub = [[Oxford City]]}}

A: Either this can be a test page created to see how wiki markup works since the wiki markup is visible(in a text like manner), and not the actual executed version of the markup. In that case it is going to be a G2 deletion. Or if can also be a BLPPROD since it is a biography without any source.

Incorrect: A7 because there is no indication of importance.

Scenario 12

A user with the name Gamerfan123 creates the following article:

GamerCon is an annual event held in the garage of Shelly Sony. Last year 10 people attended - a record. This year's event will be held October 19-21.

A: This can be an A7 deletion as the event is not in anyway important considering the information that has been provided about the event. Another action that can be taken is, we can drop a notice on the talk page of the user, requesting them to change their username, since it looks like they have some kind of COI with the subject. The conference is "Gamer" and the username is also "Gamerfan123". Though it might be reported by the bot before that since his username contains the word "fan" which is in the blacklist of DQB bot.

Y Correct.

Scenario 13

A user creates the article HomeTown Pizza with the following content:

HomeTown Pizza is a local pizza maker. It has been open since 2004. Its most popular topping, according to the local paper, is pepperoni.[1]

References
1.^ localalnewspaper.com/hometownpizza/profile.html

A: This is article actually cannot be considered to be notable. Just stating about its topping doesn't make it an article that should be included on the wikipedia. It could be a general PROD. Or I think a BEFORE search can also be done, that is before nominating it for AFD. Or it could be draftified to wait and see if there is anymore improvement on it, rather than directly jumping into deletion methods.

Y Correct.

Scenario 14

A user Someguy54321 makes the following article and 3 days later gets community banned for repeatedly operating a bot without approval.

Mary Beth Walz is a state senator in the New Hampshire House of representatives.

A: Probably BLPROD if no source can be found on the subject.

Y Correct.

Scenario 15

User:PhilHDoct creates the following article at Solar Panel 2.0:

Phil Doct has created a new solar panel which will increase energy output from existing solar panels by 30%. He was granted a patent on this invention on May 15.

A: We can send it for G11 since a user called "PhilHDoct" is talking about Phil Doct (which could possibly be he himself).

Y Correct.

Scenario 16

A user converts a redirect Tayo into an article with the following wikisource. In your answer, also evaluate if anything would be different if a user made this as a new article, rather than from a redirect.

[[Tayo the Little Bus|<span style="color: #0088ff;">You: Kill Tayo!!!!!!!!!!! </span><span style="color: #33ff0a;">Rogi: Nooooo You!!!!!!! </span><span style="color: #00a2ff;">Tayo:Help!!!!! Blood, this is my sad</span><span style="color: #ff2600;"> Gani: Call Emergency!!!!!
<span style="color: #0088ff;">You: Kill Gani!!!!!!</span><span style="color: #eeff00;"> Lani:321! Bomb you!!!</span>]]

A: This looks like some kind of a vandalism. So either I would revert the redirecting action or if it is a new article instead of a redirect, then I will tag it with G2 tag. Possibly, that page could also be redirected to Tayo the Little Bus.

Y Correct.

Scenario 17

A user named John from Acme Inc creates the following article. Assume that there is secondary sourcing present for all statements.

Acme Inc is a Mumbai based widget company with 1200 employees and 10 million (US) in revenues. They were founded in 2015 by Wiley C Oyote. Their first product was a one inch widget. Acme have won several awards for quality.

A: If there are sources, then we should judge the reliability of the source along with its verifiability. And because of the username, we can warn the user and tell him to disclose any COI with the subject. We can also warn them about UPE. We can also ask them to make edit requests instead of directly editing it, since they have a COI of the subject.

Y Correct.

Scenario 18

A user named John from Acme Inc creates the following article. Assume that there is sourcing to the company's website present for all statements.

Acme Inc is the premier award-winning Indian widget company. Located in beautiful Mumbai, the company has 1200 hard-working dedicated employees who have powered the company to over 10 million (US) in revenues. In a flash of inspiration brilliant inventor Wiley C Oyote started the company in 2015. Their first product revolutionized widgets and amazingly each new product has been even more impressive. Acme has shown themselves to be the best in the business and only has the greatest things ahead of them. "If you want widgets, you want Acme," Chief Marketing officer John Roadrunner said.

A: This is obviously promotion since a user stating that specifically that he is from Acme and is writing about Acme Inc in a promotional tone. It is surely a G11 deletion.

Y Correct.

Scenario 19

A user named John from Acme Inc creates the following article.

Acme Inc is an award-winning[1][2] Indian widget company. The company has 1200 hard-working dedicated employees[3] who have powered the company to over 10 million (US) in revenues.[2] We were founded in 2015 by Wiley C Oyote.[3] Our first product was a one inch widget.[4] Acme has become an important widget manufacturer.[3] "If you want widgets, you want Acme," Chief Marketing officer John Roadrunner said.[4]

==References==
1.^ Indian company customer reviews. http://www.indiancustomers.com/Acme
2.^ Reporter, A. "Acme Wins Award". Mumbai Newspaper. October 20, 2018.
3.^ "Why Acme" acmewidgets.com
4.^ "Acme brings Widget to Market" www.pressreleases.com

A: This could again be a G11 deletion since the idea of paid editing and promotional still doesn't go away.

Y Correct.

3. Please read WP:PROMOTION and WP:G11 and provide 2 successful CSD 11 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Please provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer i: Bobur Mansurovich Bekmurodov

Y Correct.

Answer ii: Eldar Zeynalov

Y Correct.

Please read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and answer the questions below.

3. When do we nominate a page for WP:G12 and when do we WP:REVDEL the COPYVIO text?

Answer: We nominate a page for G12 when a considerable or all of the article is copyright infringed. We request for revdel, when there are not many users who have added important and non - copyvio text and there won't be much collateral damage as a result of the revdel action.

Y Correct.

4. What constitutes copyright infringement/violation?

Answer: Copyvio is when someone wholly copies something from somewhere and the copied material is not released under the public use license, and even when the text's phrasing has been changed after they have been copied.

Y Correct.

6. Why do copyright violations need to be removed from Wikipedia?

Answer: Because copyright violation is a crime and reproduction of such are always without the permission of the copyright holder.

Y Correct.

7. Please read WP:COPYVIO, WP:REVDEL, WP:COPYPASTE, WP:DCM and WP:G12 and provide 1 successful CSD 12 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol or Article for Creation section). Pls provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. You can use Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool to check if an article is in violation of COPYVIO. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer i: Draft:Mission Inside Edge

Y Correct.

8. Pls provide 2 successful CSD in any criteria except WP:G11, WP:G12 and WP:G13 articles you have nominated from Special:NewPagesFeed (New Page Patrol "ONLY"). Please provide the article names and I will check them at your CSD log. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer i: Draft:RatCoin Elon Musk - a G3 deletion

Y Correct.

Answer ii: Dohre - a A1 deletion

Y Correct.

Communication[edit]

@Itcouldbepossible: This assignment is quite long, so it will take some time, but don't be overwhelmed. Get started whenever you're ready and let me know if you have any questions. ––FormalDude talk 04:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @FormalDude: No problem. I will start as soon as I get a little time. Thanks for grading the previous assignment and posting the new one. But I have something to know, by doing all these, what are we actually aiming at? What will happen next? What are you preparing me for? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  - @Itcouldbepossible: The goal is to make you well versed enough in Wikipedia editing to become an AfC reviewer. ––FormalDude talk 07:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
    - Oh, well then, then we are going for something good then. Thanks for preparing me in this manner. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 09:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

FormalDude I have completed the assignment. The last bit that was left of, I completed it just some while a go. Regards, Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 12:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Itcouldbepossible: Thanks, it has been graded. Please see the ones you missed and let me know if you have any questions. ––FormalDude talk 06:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
  - FormalDude Thanks a lot for grading my assignment. Currently I have no questions about the CSD assignment. I have reviewed all my mistakes. I hope to learn from them in the future. Thanks and regards, Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 08:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Tagging[edit]

In this assignment we look at tagging pages for problems. There any many tags available in Wikipedia and we will look at some of them here.

Please enable Wikipedia:HotCat in your "Wikipedia references" - see How to enable/disable HotCat. The tool lists and proposes existing categories for auto-completion. Please install StubSorter user script. The script is for adding/removing stub tags. Please install Rater user script. The scripts provides a dialog interface to add, remove, or modify WikiProject banners, including class and importance assessment. Accessible from either the page itself or its talk page. after saving, you have to bypass your browser's cache to see the changes - see instruction at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache. Please enable User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper gadget for editing, adding, and importing short descriptions.

Tagging in the article[edit]

Please read WP:TAGGING and answer the questions below. Please provide explanations in your own words and provide hist diff when applicable.

1. Why do we place tags on the article?

Answer: Tagging articles is a way of pointing out issues on the article, and indirectly asking someone else to fix the issue or work on fixing the issue. It also easily groups articles with the same problems in separate categories so that aspiring editors can work on it.

Y Correct. Tags also inform the reader of potential problems with the article.

2. What does "drive by tagging" mean?

Answer: This phrase means that we tag an article without analyzing the problem carefully and without proper justification while placing complex tags.

Y Correct.

3. List 8 common tagging behaviors that should be avoided in an article?

Answer: We should avoid the following 8 practices while tagging article:

We shouldn't tag articles, when the problem can be easily fixed, for example, instead of tagging it with {{Uncategorized}}, we can add a category that we are sure should be added.
We shouldn't place wrong tags on an article, as it can be misleading for users.
We shouldn't tag an article with too many tags. It is said that, tags only increase the backlog without improving the article in anyway. Adding too many tags won't help improve the article any faster.
We can also try and fix the problem ourselves before we go on for tagging.
We should not add two similar tags on the same page.
We should be slow while tagging articles. We should start from basic tags, and if the problem is still not solved, we can go for more complex tags.
We should not use dispensable tags as well.
We should not remove tags from pages that we have a conflict of interest.

Y Correct.

4. When is it appropriate to remove the tags?

Answer: It is appropriate to remove the tags, when the problem has been solved, and is best to discuss the matter on the talk page with experienced users and with the person who placed the tag(s).

Y Correct.

5. Tag 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed where appropriate tags are needed and provide a personal message to the creator using page curator tool.

(pls provide links)

i. Answer: Special:Diff/1089743865

Y Correct.

ii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089744092

Y Correct.

iii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089744285

Y Correct.

iv. Answer: Special:Diff/1089744299

Y Correct.

v. Answer: Special:Diff/1089927856

Y Correct.

vi. Answer: Special:Diff/1089929357

Y Correct.

vii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089929719

Y Correct.

viii. Answer: Special:Diff/1091323218

Talk page message: Special:Diff/1091325425

Y Correct.

ix. Answer: Special:Diff/1091417234

Talk page message: Special:Diff/1091417359

Y Correct.

x. Answer: Special:Diff/1091583850

Talk page message: Special:Diff/1091583850/1091587285

Y Correct.
6. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types and use StubSorter user script. Tag 10 sub class article correctly from Special:Newpagesfeed. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Special:Diff/1089870705

Y Correct.

ii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089871365

Incorrect: Article is start class, not stub.

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1091161678

iii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089872244

Incorrect: Wrong template, should have been {{Scotland-footyclub-stub}}

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1091416331

Y Correct.

iv. Answer: Special:Diff/1089924353

Incorrect: Article is disambiguation class, not stub.

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1091582009

Y Correct.

v. Answer: Special:Diff/1089926429

Y Correct.

vi. Answer: Special:Diff/1089930397

Incorrect: This is a draft, not an article.

FormalDude But this was an article, when I stubbed it. Then I thought, that I would draftify the article. But as you might see from the page history, I stubbed it first, before draftification. Isn't this still correct? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 14:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1091588815

Y Correct.

vii. Answer: Special:Diff/1091589735

Y Correct.

viii. Answer: Special:Diff/1091590695

Y Correct.

ix. Answer: Special:Diff/1092096107

Y Correct.

x. Answer: Special:Diff/1092097380

Incorrect: Only place one stub template (in this case {{Footy-bio-stub}}).

Categorization[edit]

7. Please read Wikipedia:Categorization and assign 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed to one or more useful categories. You can check similar articles for potentially relevant categories. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Special:Diff/1089930024

Y Correct.

ii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089931205

Y Correct.

iii. Answer: Special:Diff/1090100509/1090100731 (it includes other changes as well alongside categorization)

Y Correct.

iv. Answer: Special:Diff/1090964604/1090965861

Y Correct.

v. Answer: Special:Diff/1091161554

Y Correct.

vi. Answer: Special:Diff/1091412772

Y Correct.

vii. Answer: Special:Diff/1091413526/1091415829 - along with other fixes

Y Correct.

viii. Answer: Special:Diff/1091414510/1091414892 - multiple categorization edits

Y Correct.

ix. Answer: Special:Diff/1091577039/1091583309

Y Partly correct: Since his work is from the 21st century, he is a 21st-century writer.

x. Answer: Special:Diff/1091583558/1091584173

Y Correct.

WikiProject Sorting[edit]

8. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject and Wikipedia:Content assessment and tag 10 articles from Special:Newpagesfeed with appropriate WikiProject and class types on the articles' talk pages. Please use Rater user script. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Talk:Ali Mo'tazed - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

ii. Answer: Talk:2022–23 ATK Mohun Bagan FC season - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

iii. Answer: Talk:SLT Pindad - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

iv. Answer: Talk:National Archaeological Museum of Metaponto - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

v. Answer: Draft talk:Cilcennin - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

vi. Answer: Draft talk:Yam porridge - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

vii. Answer: Talk:Dil Awaiz (2022 TV series) - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

viii. Answer: Draft talk:2016 U.S. Virgin Islands presidential caucuses - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Incorrect: This is a draft, not an article.

FormalDude This is also the same case. I draftified it latter. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 14:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Please provide another: Talk:Melanconiella - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

ix. Answer: Talk:NGC 4502 - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

x. Answer: Talk:Carlisle Castle Hotel - Diff couldn't be generated as mine is the first edit.

Y Correct.

WikiProject Short description[edit]

9. Short descriptions help a reader to identify which search result is most likely to suit their needs. Most mainspace pages should have a description, preferably no longer than 40 characters. Please read Wikipedia:Short description and Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions and provide 10 short descriptions in 10 different articles from Special:Newpagesfeed. Please enable User:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper prior making the edits. (pls provide links)

i. Answer: Special:Diff/1089742838

Y Correct: However, the article uses British English and therefore so should the short description. Organization should be organisation.

ii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089870241

Y Correct.

iii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089870421

Incorrect: We shouldn't use "Wikimedia" or "article" in the short description unless the topic is about Wikimedia or an article.

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1090737476

Y Correct.

iv. Answer: Special:Diff/1089873442

Y Correct.

v. Answer: Special:Diff/1089886931

Y Correct.

vi. Answer: Special:Diff/1089917360

Y Correct.

vii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089926813

Incorrect: We shouldn't use "Wikimedia" or "article" in the short description unless the topic is about Wikimedia or an article.

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1090753052

Y Correct.

viii. Answer: Special:Diff/1089927252

Incorrect: We shouldn't use "Wikimedia" or "article" in the short description unless the topic is about Wikimedia or an article.

Please provide another: Special:Diff/1090932928

Y Correct.

ix. Answer: Special:Diff/1089927641

Y Correct.

x. Answer: Special:Diff/1089927797

Y Correct.

Communication[edit]

@Itcouldbepossible ––FormalDude talk 07:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Thanks for this assignment. I am going to try my best. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 07:42, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Questions[edit]

Where will I find the curation toolbar? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 09:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Itcouldbepossible: In the top right corner of your Wikipedia account. ––FormalDude talk 17:50, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
  - @FormalDude: Ok, but I am not a new page reviewer, then how do I use the curation toolbar to send messages as stated in the tagging assignment?Itcouldbepossible^Talk 02:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
    - @Itcouldbepossible: Ah, right, you won't be able to use that. Just add the tags via twinkle instead please, and leave a message on their talk page manually. ––FormalDude talk 15:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
      - @FormalDude: Oh Gosh! I have not sent a single message for the tagging that I have done. What will I do now? I didn't know of this before, or I would have cleared if from you before. I didn't know that I won't be able to use the curation toolbar. What is to be done now? Please help me. Itcouldbepossible^Talk 08:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
        @Itcouldbepossible: Just make sure to send a message for the rest of the tags. ––FormalDude talk 18:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
        @FormalDude: I got quite tensed when you said that I will have to send the messages manually, as already I had tagged many articles before this discussion even came up. Thanks, for considering my position. I am surely going to leave messages for the rest of the articles that I tag. Regards, Itcouldbepossible^Talk 04:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
FormalDude I have completed the assignment. Will you please grade it? Regards. Itcouldbepossible ^Talk 04:52, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Filtering - Deletion policy & other alternatives[edit]

In assignment 4, we looked at articles which meet WP:Criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) whereby the the articles are deleted within a few hours to 24 hours from the time of the nomination. In this assignment, we discuss the what actions should be taken for those articles do not fit under the CSD criteria but do not meet relevant criteria for content of the encyclopedia.

Please read WP:PROD, WP:BLPPROD, WP:MERGE, WP:DRAFTIFY, WP:NPPDRAFT and WP:REDIR, WP:AFD and answer the following questions. (Provide links and hisdiff as needed.)

1. Under what circumstances do we propose deletion (PROD) a page and why do we do that?

Answer: We can go for PROD when the deletion would be uncontroversial, none of the CSD criteria can be applied, and when AFD could be avoided to shorten the deletion process.

2. What should we do before we PROD a page? And what should be considered during a nomination?

Answer: First and foremost, a WP:BEFORE search needs to be performed. Then we have to check the following:

It has not been vandalized recently.

It has not been sent for PROD before.

It has not been previously restored after deletion.

And it has never been nominated for AfD, and nor is it being currently discussed.

3. What is the criteria when nominating a BLPPROD? If we choose not to BLPPROD a page what are the alternatives? (give three examples with explanations)

Answer: Very easy. It has to a WP:BLP article, that is the article has to be a biography of a living person to qualify for BLPPROD. If we choose not to got for BLPPROD, then we can go for AFD, or we can recheck to find out if any CSD criterion can be applied, or we can tag the article with problems, like it is uncited and sources must be added, and we can notify the the author of the said article regarding the same.

4. In what circumstances can we nominate an AFD and what step should be done prior such action.

Answer: If we cannot use PROD and CSD also doesn't apply, and when a discussion would be better before deletion (like when the author is a little unsure about PROD), then an AfD can be started for a delete discussion.

Before any delete discussion, we should go for a WP:BEFORE search.

5 How long do PROD, BLPPROD and AFD last before it is deleted or decline?

Answer: PROD and BLPPRODs last for 7 days, that is if the tag is in place for 7 days continuously, without it ever being removed, then the article can be deleted by an administrator. But PROD tags can be removed by anyone, even the author itself. So, without intervention PROD goes for 7 days. AFDs are also for 7 days. When a patrolling admin or any other user in good standing sees that the AFD hasn't got good discussion, or further discussion needs to take place to reach a better consensus, then the article can obviously be relisted. I have seen articles being relisted twice. Then, I think they are either kept or deleted as per the consensus reached.

6. Suppose a page has been previously BLPROD and a source was provided. If you still think that article should be deleted, what can you do?

Answer: Well, there are many ways to do it. We can again PROD it, but not a BLPPROD, since a source has been provided, and then we put the reason as to why we want the page to be deleted. We can also go for AFD as well. CSD won't be a good idea, because we have already decided to PROD because CSD cannot be applied. So, either we re-prod it, or send it to AFD. It can also happen if an article is exceptionally short, and can be merged to another nearly similar topic to avoid deletion.

7. What are the reason to WP:Merge a page to another page?

Answer: Merging can be done when an article alone would be not notable, but also the material in it is useful. So what we can do is, copy rightful amounts of material and paste it to another article that is closely related to the subject and has established itself as notable, and rephrase it again too look meaningful. In this way, we are not actually deleting the article, but rather copying the information to another article.

8. List 10 reasons we may WP:REDIR instead of deleting.

Answer: These are 10 of the many reasons we may redirect a page instead of deleting.

Punctuation problems
Wrong spellings
Alternate names, or when WP:COMMONNAME applies
Shortcuts
Abbreviations
Related terms or words
Wrong capitalization of letters
Draftification
Alternative spelling, like american spellings can be directed to british spelling of the article and vice-versa.
An article when created is not notable enough, but can exist as a redirect to a sub-topic of a notable article.

9. Please list the ways that you should search for sources in preparation for a PROD or AfD nomination, including steps which may only be relevant for certain subjects. How does this list change for subjects which are likely to have coverage in languages that you cannot read?

Answer: A lot of searches is not actually needed. A google search, a google news search to find possible press releases and a google scholar search to find any journal papers or anything which might have been left behind in the former to searches. Searching for the article on wikidata might help to reveal any other article regarding it on any other wiki, then we can translate the page, and get content from it, and also sources that have been used in the article. But just to note, the translation must be rephrased to look meaningful as machine translations are always not cent percent accurate.

10. When can an article be moved to draft space?

Answer: I think I am an expert in this, lets see if I can answer perfectly.

We draftify namely for the following reasons:
The page has non-NPOV content and also indicates possible WP:COI.

The article might be notable if it is worked upon.

To give time to the editor to improve on the article if it is a new editor and has moved out the draft by mistake.

To avoid deletion like CSD or going for AFD if the article is relatively young.
These are all I can remember. Editing after long...possibly I have forgotten things. Correct me if I have gone wrong somewhere.

Additional questions about Wikipedia policies and guidelines as they relate to deletion discussions

1. In your own words, describe the difference between policies, guidelines, and essays. Also explain briefly how references to each of these may be used in deletion discussions

Answer: Policies in my opinion are basically rules and guidelines act like How-To-Do manuals. Policies are abided by the community strictly and there are possibly no exception to it, while there are certain bypasses to guidelines. Essays are totally different things. Essays are user written and they represent what someone thinks about something. Some are treated with importance, while some lay old in the untouched corners of Wikipedia.

2. Some WikiProjects have published essays on notability for topics related to their project, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide. As a new page reviewer, how should you use such essays?

Answer: They should be treated as addition support when judging the notability of an article along with the relevant SNG.

3. When evaluating notability, are you primarily evaluating the article, or the article's subject?

Answer: We need to evaluate both the article's text and the article's subject, for the references and the sources would be related to the subject of the article, and not on a different something else.

4. What is your interpretation of the role of WP:BURO and WP:IAR in new page patrol and deletion discussions?

Answer: WP:BURO and WP:IAR are policies on Wikipedia that provide guidance on how to approach situations where following strict policies or guidelines might not be appropriate or effective. In new page patrol and deletion discussions, WP:BURO and WP:IAR can be useful in certain situations. For example, if a new page is flagged for deletion but a reviewer believes it should be kept due to its potential significance, they may invoke WP:IAR to argue that the page should be kept despite not meeting the strict criteria for inclusion. Similarly, if a deletion discussion is being conducted but the strict interpretation of the deletion policy may result in an unjust outcome, WP:BURO may be invoked to override that interpretation. However, it is important to note that the use of WP:BURO and WP:IAR should be limited and not used as a blanket justification for disregarding policies or guidelines without proper reasoning. In cases where the strict interpretation of policy is in line with the goals of Wikipedia, it should be followed rather than relying on WP:BURO or WP:IAR to justify exceptions. Additionally, it is important to engage in discussions and consensus-building before invoking WP:BURO or WP:IAR, to ensure that all perspectives are considered and the best possible outcome is achieved.

11. Nominate 5 articles for WP:AFD by using WP:Twinkle and provide explanations for your nominations. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In the Crease (studio show) (2nd nomination)

Answer 2:

Answer 3:

Answer 4:

Answer 5:

12. Participate in 5 WP:AFD that have no votes other than the nominator's statement. Please provide your reason either to delete, keep, redirect or merge.

Answer 1:

Delete discussion page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Otto K. Schwarz.

My vote: Special:Diff/1093197249

Result:

Answer 2: Delete discussion page:

My vote:

Result:

Answer 3: Delete discussion page:

My vote:

Result:

Answer 4: Delete discussion page:

My vote:

Result:

Answer 5: Delete discussion page:

My vote:

Result:

13. Nominate 2 articles for WP:PROD and state your reasons. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1:

Answer 2:

14. Nominate 2 article for WP:BLPROD and state your reasons. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1: Lynda ddane

Answer 2:

15. Nominate 2 article for WP:NPPDRAFT and state your reasons. Take as much time as you need in order to complete this assignment successfully.

Answer 1: Draft:Vic Damone (Album)
Reason: A page created in mainspace with no secondary sources but might become suitable for becoming an article if given some more time for development.

Answer 2: Draft:Diego Santis
Reason: A WP:BLP article that is fully unreferenced. Researches show that the footballer might even be non-notable. Draftified to give more time for development and find sources.