Progress Report 2024-01-07: Difference between revisions

Line 49:

<li>Try to remove stub notice as an administrator. '''This should work, as per rules set in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Special:AbuseFilter abusefilter].'''</li></ol><span id="to-do---stub-moderation-guidelines"></span>

<li>Try to remove stub notice as an administrator. '''This should work, as per rules set in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Special:AbuseFilter abusefilter].'''</li></ol>

=== TO DO - Stub notice variants ===

As well as a stub notice (for articles that are just way too short/under-detailed, we need the following two notices:

* Needs additional verification (for an article that might be basically fine, but is dangerously under-cited, or the citations are very sus. should only lead to deletion if it's in massive violation of NOR and there's no good sources to fix it with)

* Questionable Relevance (for an article that is on the edge of not being relevant/being a yelp-like thing. Basically a limbo to put articles in where 'you'd better give a good reason for this article to exist, or else it's not going to exist in a few days!')

On a technical level, these should be implemented in much the same way as the stub - we just need different notices for different problem articles.<span id="to-do---stub-moderation-guidelines"></span>

=== TO DO - stub moderation guidelines must be added to moderation/rules ===

@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 <ol start="4" style="list-style-type: decimal;">
-<li>Try to remove stub notice as an administrator. '''This should work, as per rules set in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Special:AbuseFilter abusefilter].'''</li></ol><span id="to-do---stub-moderation-guidelines"></span>
+<li>Try to remove stub notice as an administrator. '''This should work, as per rules set in [https://wiki.rossmanngroup.com/index.php/Special:AbuseFilter abusefilter].'''</li></ol>
+=== TO DO -  Stub notice variants ===
+As well as a stub notice (for articles that are just way too short/under-detailed, we need the following two notices:
+* Needs additional verification (for an article that might be basically fine, but is dangerously under-cited, or the citations are very sus. should only lead to deletion if it's in massive violation of NOR and there's no good sources to fix it with)
+* Questionable Relevance (for an article that is on the edge of not being relevant/being a yelp-like thing. Basically a limbo to put articles in where 'you'd better give a good reason for this article to exist, or else it's not going to exist in a few days!')
+On a technical level, these should be implemented in much the same way as the stub - we just need different notices for different problem articles.<span id="to-do---stub-moderation-guidelines"></span>
 === TO DO - stub moderation guidelines must be added to moderation/rules ===