User talk:Buaidh

President creates Chimney Rock National Monument‎
Hi. In its current form, I assessed the article not-ready for publication. Please see review comments; also, may be of interest. --Pi zero (talk) 21:49, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Categories
We're pretty circumspect about creating categories on Wikinews; we generally require at least three published articles for a category before creating it (that's down from a historically larger number, I think it used to be at least six), and we generally try to more-or-less-fully populate it when created. Categories with only one or two published articles are usually easy targets for WN:DR. --Pi zero (talk) 16:51, 26 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Certainly don't dispute creation of those categories, but we "usually" only do so when we can put a handful of articles into them.
 * At some point a search will get done for older articles to fill out the categories, but if you see any which match the categories you've created, let me know or post links on WN:AAA (since older articles are fully protected per archiving policy). --Brian McNeil / talk 19:55, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Article going stale on the review queue
Some "inside" perspective on this phenomenon, in general.

It happens even when there's much more available reviewer labor than there is at the moment. When review-labor supply goes up, so that output goes up (after a time delay, of course), demand goes up too, until demand exceeds supply. Much-sought-after improvements to the system should change the constants in the equation, but one strongly suspects there will always be a shortfall &mdash; if review standards are to mean anything (and the project would have no value if they didn't), one must be willing to see some articles exceeding supply go stale awaiting review.

We do get articles (not all, demonstratedly) reviewed in a timely fashion. When there's competition on the queue, often I (for one) will choose to review on the young end of the review queue, i.e., the articles most recently submitted, because if published they will be the freshest, and if found not-ready they will have the largest amount of time for problems to be corrected. I started tending toward this approach when I realized that when demand really does exceed supply, reviewing from the old end of the queue won't get more articles published but will make every review harder and more stressful for the reviewer and less useful for the writer (because one lacks the realistic option of sending the article back for improvements), may get fewer articles published (because those sent back won't get fixed in time), and will minimize the freshness of the ones that do get published. --Pi zero (talk) 18:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)