User:Danre98/Curation Checklist


 * Short description check
 * Check for notability. If unsure, tag the article.

Prior to nominating article(s) for deletion, please be sure to:


 * A. Read and understand these policies and guidelines:
 * 1) The Wikipedia deletion policy, which explains valid grounds for deletion as well as alternatives to deletion and the various deletion processes
 * 2) The main four guidelines and policies that inform deletion discussions: notability (WP:N), verifiability (WP:V), reliable sources (WP:RS), and what Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)
 * 3) Subject-specific notability guidelines, which can be found at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines, with further related essays at Category:Wikipedia notability. Common outcomes may be checked to see if other articles on a specific topic tend to be kept or deleted after an AfD discussion


 * B. Carry out these checks:
 * 1) Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, proposed deletion or speedy keep.
 * 2) If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.)
 * 3) Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing.
 * 4) Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with.
 * 5) Check to see if enough time has passed since previous nominations before renominating.
 * 6) Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia.
 * 7) Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better-sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lede.


 * C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted
 * 1) If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD.
 * 2) If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article.
 * 3) If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, or an associated WikiProject, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as, , , or ; this ensures readers are aware of the problem and may act to remedy it.
 * 4) If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article.  This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term. If a redirection is controversial, however, AfD may be an appropriate venue for discussing the change in addition to the article's talk page.


 * D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability:
 * 1) The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects.
 * 2) If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an AfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an AfD nomination may still be appropriate.
 * 3) If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, using the advice in How to cite sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include unreferenced, refimprove, third-party, primary sources and one source. For a more complete list see WP:CTT.


 * Check wikiprojects
 * Update ratings


 * Check the page history for recent problematic edits, or for new users to welcome
 * Consider WP:RFPP if necessary
 * Take care of stub tags- remove, add, sort
 * Categorize page
 * Search for sources and add them
 * Tag and untag for cleanup
 * Check for the appropriate infobox- see Category:Infobox templates
 * Completely read through the article
 * Verify statements and sources
 * Find sources and add them. Write stuff.
 * Address cleanup templates
 * Run citation bot
 * Run reference organizer
 * Check for dupe links
 * Check for disambig links
 * Repeat