Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Transition FAQ

What's going on?
The list of nominations on Good article nominations no longer needs to be updated by hand. Instead, User:GA bot will keep the list updated automatically based on current nominations. This will eliminate the need to keep both the nominated article's talk page and the central list up to date, simplifying the process.

What will I need to do differently?
The process is largely the same, except that WP:GAN itself no longer needs to be edited. However, there are some essential differences:
 * To change the status of a nomination, it has to be changed through the  parameter on the GA nominee template. For example, , and   indicate that a nomination is requesting a second opinion and is on hold, respectively. The bot will update WP:GAN appropriately to reflect the nomination status as it changes.
 * To leave a note with a nomination, it needs to be left through the  parameter on the GA nominee template. The bot will post the note on WP:GAN, and update the note if it is edited. Leaving a note by editing WP:GAN itself won't work.

What about the existing nominations?
The existing nominations will not be affected. In the past year while the new system has been undergoing testing and development, small, incremental changes have been made to the existing process to ensure a smooth transition to an automatically updated nominations list.

If I edit the page directly, will the bot overwrite my edits?
Only edits made to the GAN entries themselves will be overwritten. Just about every other part of the page is editable without bot interference, including the section headers themselves. This means that new sections can be created, and existing ones can be removed.

How can I report glitches?
Please address any and all glitches to Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, or User talk:Harej if it is especially urgent.

What if I don't like the changes made and the automated GAN page?
Every effort has been made to make the new system easy to use, robust, and transparent to nominators and reviewers, so that it genuinely simplifies procedures for everyone. After 28 days in operation, there were no major problems: the process was reevaluated from 16-24 October, and comments were almost unequivocally supportive of the change. If you disagree, your views are welcome at WT:GAN at any time.

My question has not been answered
Feel free to address your concerns to Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations.