Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red/Drafts

This is great work. A few random clicks show that there are ALOT of worthy topics here that failed due to the inexperience of the new editor. It would be great if a reviewer could notify a project--"hey, this article is weak and can't be published but the topic is clearly notable." What's the best way to revise these? I redid Alice Lightner Hopf (more work to be done still) rather than revise/resubmitting the draft. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@AugusteBlanqui: I've just done an update (I'll post it on WiR talk in a mo) which should hopefully make spotting wheat from chaff easier. I haven't thought of any obvious process, I've just randomly looked at them and seen what I can do with them. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:37, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This a wonderful start to this proposal: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red#Proposal for a spreadsheet of women's biographies that were declined as non-notable in the AfC submissions process. I LOVE the idea of including the first sentence. Not quite a "hook", it gives more information than just a name. Well done, Ritchie. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:52, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) The nice thing about having the lead sentence is it's easy to see at a glance what to focus on. "'x' is associate professor at the University of 'y'" leaps out immediately as worth a look; conversely, "'y' was born in 2003 and goes by the same Snookums on Instagram and Tumblr" ..... doesn't. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm following someone else's lead by adding the Done template next to the article I've improved and moved to mainspace. Question: if we spot an article about a man, ok to remove it? --Rosiestep (talk) 17:13, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think flagging it up in some way would be useful, so I can see how the script thought it was appropriate. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:18, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Daniel Morgan Taylor was included with the list because of the sentence starting, "His wife, Annie Landon Gardner ...." Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 07:40, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Tsukamoto[edit]

This https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ann_Tsukamoto was rejected. I checked the creator--a student editor. Ann Tsukamoto outright satisfies notability--no doubt this is why the student was given her as a topic! Yes the article needs improvement but it should not have been rejected for the reasons given. It needs a thorough copy edit more than anything else. Three clicks and I was at the instructor's project page. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, a number I've looked at look like they ought to be salvageable with a few sources, I'm just not sure where to look. I know at one point Anne Delong was very active in trying to identify drafts tagged from CSD G13 and which were worth holding onto in the hope that at least somebody might salvage them. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did take an interest in this for quite a while, but once I had a list with a couple of thousand pages on it by the middle of 2016, I had to stop taking on new ones and work on the ones I had. Very few were fixed up by other editors, probably because drafts aren't very visible. I have worked through most of them (User:Anne Delong/AfC content rescued from db-g13), and recently I have starting looking at the declined drafts again.

I often see drafts that have been declined, but could easily be improved to make good articles, because a quick search shows that there are references available on the Internet. As long as drafts like this don't have copyright issues or BLP violations, they really should be in mainspace where others will see them and fix them up by adding citations. If I see one like that, I make a few improvements out of respect for the reviewer who declined it, and then move it to mainspace, especially if it's been sitting for months and the original editor isn't showing interest. I encourage AugusteBlanqui to do the same, or if the student editor is still active, contact him or her and collaborate to improve the page.—Anne Delong (talk) 17:53, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AugusteBlanqui, Do NOT create standalone new articles, after having arrived at the topic through a draft.That's bad and unethical practice.Just, main-space the draft and copy-edit it, to your wishes. ∯WBG^converse 11:10, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RonBot11 not running?[edit]

Hi, just wondering why RonBot11 has not run for the last 2 weeks? The page was last updated by RonBot11 on 7th of April. I hope it will resume - there are many notable subjects whose draft articles can be improved and resubmitted/moved to mainspace, it would be a great pity to lose access to the rejected drafts. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:22, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]