Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review

The review department of WikiProject Cricket is the project's main forum for conducting detailed reviews (both formal and informal) of particular articles and other content within its scope.

The department hosts two forms of review internal to the project:

• Peer review (an informal review meant to provide ideas for further improvement)
• A-Class review (a formal review of a candidate for an A-Class quality assessment)

It also provides a convenient collection of cricket content currently undergoing featured content reviews outside the project:

• Featured article candidates
• Featured article review
• Featured list candidates
• Featured list removal candidates
• Non-article featured content candidates

Peer review

Instructions

Requesting a review

1. Add peer-review=yes to the {{WikiProject Cricket}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax).
2. From there, click on the "request has been made" link that appears in the template. This will open a page to discuss the review of your article.
3. Place === [[Name of nominated article]] === at the top.
4. Below it, write your reason for nominating the article and sign by using four tildes (~~~~).
5. Add {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article}} at the top of the list of peer review requests below.

If an article is listed for a second (or third, and so forth) peer review:

1. Move (do not copy) the existing peer review subpage {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article}} to an archive {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article/Archive 1}}.
2. Follow the instructions for making a request above: editing {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article}}, which will be a redirect to the archive, into a new request page.
3. Be sure to provide a prominent link to the last archive at the top of the request: e.g. "Prior peer review {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article/Archive 1|here}}".

Transcluding a review from another location

1. Add peer-review=yes to the {{WikiProject Cricket}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax).
2. From there, click on the "request has been made" link that appears in the template. This will open a page to discuss the review of your article.
3. Add #REDIRECT [[External peer review page location]] to the page.
4. Add {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article}} at the top of the list of peer review requests below.

Commenting

Everyone is encouraged to comment on any request listed here. To comment on an article, please add a new section (using ==== Your user name ====) for your comments, in order to keep multiple responses legible.

Archiving

Reviews should be archived after they have been inactive for some time, or when the article is nominated as a featured article candidate. To archive a review:

1. Replace peer-review=yes with old-peer-review=yes in the {{WikiProject Cricket}} project banner template at the top of the article's talk page
2. Move {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Peer review/Name of nominated article}} from this page to the current peer review archive page.

A-Class review

Instructions

Requesting a review

To request an A-Class review of an article:

1. Add A-Class=current to the {{WikiProject Cricket}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax).
2. From there, click on the "currently undergoing" link that appears in the template. This will open a page to discuss the status of the article.
3. Place === [[Name of nominated article]] === at the top.
4. Below it, write your reason for nominating the article and sign by using four tildes (~~~~).
5. Add {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review/Name of nominated article}} at the top of the list of A-Class review requests below.

If an article is nominated a second (or third, and so forth) time, either because it failed a prior nomination, or because it may no longer meet the standards and may thus need to be demoted:

1. Move (do not copy) the existing review subpage {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review/Name of nominated article}} to an archive {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review/Name of nominated article/Archive 1}}.
2. Follow the instructions for making a request above: editing {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review/Name of nominated article}}, which will be a redirect to the archive, into a new nomination page.
3. Be sure to provide a prominent link to the last archive at the top of the nomination statement: e.g. "Prior nomination {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review/Name of nominated article/Archive 1|here}}".

There is no limit on how quickly renominations of failed articles may be made; it is perfectly acceptable to renominate as soon as the outstanding objections from the previous nomination have been satisfied.

Commenting

Reviewers should keep the criteria for featured articles in mind when supporting or opposing a nomination. However, please note that (unlike actual featured articles) A-Class articles are not expected to fully meet all of the criteria; an objection should indicate a substantive problem with the article. In particular, objections over relatively minor issues of writing style or formatting should be avoided at this stage; a comprehensive, accurate, well-sourced, and decently-written article should qualify for A-Class status even if it could use some further copyediting.

Closing and archiving

Reviews will be closed by one of the reviewers, normally after four days have elapsed. However, any reviewer may extend the four-day review period by up to three days if (a) the article has no opposes but insufficient support for promotion or if (b) the article's nominator requests, prior to the review's closure, more time to resolve matters arising. An article will generally be promoted to A-Class if (a) it has garnered at least three endorsements from uninvolved editors, and (b) there are no substantive objections indicative of a major flaw in the article.

To extend the review period, reviewers should add, directly above the nomination text, as appropriate:

1. either :'''Review extended''' until [time], [date] (UTC) to garner further comment. ~~~~
2. or :'''Review extended''' until [time], [date] (UTC) to resolve existing objections. ~~~~.

To close a review, reviewers should:

1. Add {{subst:archive top}} and {{subst:archive bottom}} to the top and bottom of the review subpage, respectively.
2. Change the A-Class=current in the {{WikiProject Cricket}} project banner at the top of the article's talk page to either A-Class=pass (if the nomination is successful) or A-Class=fail (if it is not), and update the assessment class if needed.
3. Move the {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Review/Name of nominated article}} from the list of requests below to the current archive page.
4. Remove the article link from the A-Class review list at {{tl|WikiProject Cricket Announcements}} (if and when created).
5. If the nomination was successful, add the article name to the list of A-Class articles.

Non-article featured content candidates

I'd like to call peoples attention to an innovative cricket coaching aid "The Batting Strip" produced by GAPS Games. This is a coaching aid that has seen very little advertising but can be used by individuals all year round. Potentially a great help in getting people involved who may not have much space or have access to a cricket club facilities. Have a look at http://www.gapsgames.com/index.html and maybe someone might put in a link to the website on the cricket page ?

Thanks Sentinal8579 (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Archives

Peer review

A-Class review