User:Giggy/GA tools

This is my page, and thus a bit biased in that most of my stuff is towards the top! :) Feel free to add anything useful you may find.


 * User:Giggy/A noob's guide to GA reviewing - Some tips on the basics of reviewing, as well as common issues and things to look out for.
 * User:DHMO/GAAH - Adds a ArticleHistory, with "action1", "action1result" (passed...I'll put a parser in for failed candidates one of these days), "action1date" using  ), and "currentstatus" (GA) parameters filled in. "topic" is filled in using paramater   , and options can be found at CAT:UCGA. Usage:  GA topic .
 * If you use this on a talk page which also has peer review, DYK, failedGA, or any other of these kinds of banners...please don't! The easist solution on these pages is just to add GA (and the formatting that goes with it) and let GimmeBot fix it when it gets around to it. If you're good with templates, you can subst the articlehistory, then add the other events into parameters.
 * User:DHMO/GAP - Adds a footer for passing a GA nomination. This explains that the article has passed and is listed at WP:GA, and also suggests the nominator review an article (also linking to the mentors page).
 * User:Giggy/GAN backlog - A box you can add to your user/talk pages, displaying the five oldest unreviewed nominations. Updated by a bot daily per WP:GAN/R, can also be changed manually by clicking the edit link.
 * WP:RGA - Essentials/basics on how to review, as well as some advanced pointers and other useful tips.
 * WP:QFC - Quick fail criteria, for articles not yet ready for a full review.
 * WP:GAN/M - "Mentors" who have expressed an interest in helping out with the GA process, and who are happy to check your reviews and generally watch over your shoulder if you need any assistance.
 * WP:GAN/R - Bot updated GAN statistics, including oldest nominations, most prolific nominators, and other data.
 * WT:GAN - The best place to ask for general help on any aspect of GAN. Watched by many.

REMEMBER we all want to improve articles and we're all acting in good faith. Some people get frustrated at misuse of the GA process...it's inevitable. But please don't EVER think the GA project, or the people involved in it, want it to be (or appear to be) "a minefield where every action and statement goes against something somewhere beginning with WP:, someone's sensibilities or 'the norm' for the GA project." (&mdash;Someone another, WT:VG (perma). We're actually nice people here to build an encyclopedia, just like you! :)