User:Indubitably/Good Article development

Good articles are those that have not reached the featured article standard or are unlikely to reach this high standard soon due to a variety of reasons; however, providing an article meets certain quality standards and has passed through the good article nomination process, it may be listed as a Good article. There are currently about 0 Good articles.

Choose an article
Focus on what interests you, what you are knowledgeable in. Then decide how much effort you would like to put into the article. If you want the glory of bringing an article from almost nothing to GA, choose a stub. If you prefer to build off of the work of others, choose either a start or B class article.

Note that some topics are more difficult to bring up to GA standards, due to various reasons. For example, professional wrestling articles frequently encounter several issues. Much care must be taken to ensure the article is not written "in-universe". That is to say that fictional characters and events must not be written as real. There is often an issue with finding reliable sources because of the copyrights on video, audio, and print, as well as strict confidentiality clauses in wrestler contracts. Lastly, there is a guide for these articles, created by the pro-wrestling Wikiproject.

Collaboration
Check the article history to determine how many, if any, other editors constructively contribute to the article on a regular basis. These will be your collaborators. Speaking of collaborators, also check the article talk page for WikiProject banners. You may find that others have taken the same interest in the article as you. [Describe the different projects that could be found. Specific (i.e. Wikiproject My Chemical Romance) vs broad (i.e. Wikiproject Rock music). You may consider joining any listed WikiProjects and, in the case of the latter example, if there is no more specific project in place, consider creating a task force. If no projects exist at all, you may consider creating one.

Compare the article to the criteria
You'll need to be familiar with the good article criteria in order to determine where the article is in need of improvement. You want to ensure that:
 * 1a. the prose is clear and the grammar correct
 * 1b. the article is in compliance with six aspects of the manual of style:
 * lead
 * layout
 * jargon
 * words to avoid
 * fiction
 * list incorporation


 * 2a. the article is adequately referenced, and those references are consistently formatted per WP:CITE
 * 2b. all quotes and material which may be challenged are referenced using inline citation
 * 2c. the article contains no original research
 * 3a. the article is broad in coverage and addresses all major aspects
 * 3b. the article remains focused with no unnecessary detail
 * 4a. the article maintains a neutral point of view
 * 4b. the article represents all views
 * 5. the article is stable
 * 6a. all images are appropriately tagged and captioned
 * 6b. if no images are included, that the topic does not require images for GA
 * 6c. any non-free images are accompanied by detailed fair use rationales

Nominate the article at GAC
Once you feel the article meets the criteria, list it at WP:GA under the most appropriate category. A reviewer will (hopefully sooner than later) pick your article from the list and begin their review. Three possibly results await. Pass, fail, or hold.

No matter what the decision, if reviewed correctly, you should be left with a list of possible improvements. No article is perfect &mdash; there is always room for improvement. Do not take offense to recommendations left by reviewers, and do not be afraid to point out your disagreement with any of them, but always assume good faith and be civil during such situations.

Fail
There are two different types of fails. You really want to avoid the first; quick-fail. These typically yield little, if any, of a review. So be sure that the article does not meet any of the quick-fail criteria. Ensure your article is adequately sourced, has a neutral point of view, contains no cleanup banners or tags, and is stable (no edit-warring).

The second is a fail after an extensive review. Do not be discouraged if your article fails. Once you address the issues listed by the reviewer, you can renominate the article. You may also want to consider a peer review to prepare for your next attempt for GA. For issues you don't understand, you can always request help. For example, if your reviewer suggests that the article have a good copy-edit, but that is not something you are good at, ask a WikiGnome to look over the article and make necessary changes.

On hold
Articles that are very close to GA quality, but have a few issues, are put on hold. Hold periods are generally no less than two days and no more than seven. Use this time to address the issues listed by the reviewer. A very easy way to keep track (for both you and the reviewer) of progress is to strike-through recommendations and follow with  as they are completed. If all issues are adequately addressed, the article will then be promoted.

Pass
The preferred outcome is, of course, a pass. Know, however, that passes often also come with suggestions for improvement from the reviewer. Just because you have achieved your goal does not mean you should ignore any such recommendations. They should be addressed just as with a pass or on hold result.

Good article review

 * Main article: Good article review overview