Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Admins and patrollers/Display a notice on newly created articles

Random proposal ►◄ Admins and patrollers The survey has concluded. Here are the results!

Display a notice on newly created articles

Problem: For many wikipedians, Admins and Patrollers don't leave enough time to do some articles. Me for example, I create an article and 8 minutes later it was deleted.
Proposed solution: Display a notice on newly created articles, for maybe 30 minutes, noting that it has only just been created.
Who would benefit: Anyone who want to do articles
More comments:
Phabricator tickets:
Proposer: Owee mªthias (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@Owee mªthias: the only time limits about new page creation are in large values (weeks+) and have to do with indexing. I think what you are talking about is a process that people are doing on a project, and not something that will be resolved with a technology change - correct? — xaosflux ^Talk 01:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There might be some possibilty to add {{in use}} or equivalent - many users don't know that this possibility exists. But this can be misused by spammers. JAn Dudík (talk) 08:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @JAn Duík: That template is for major edits to an existing article. It's not for an article created five minutes ago. That's what sandboxes and drafts are for. One would think you would have known that. I guess not. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 09:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Owee mªthias: As noted by Xaosflux above - this seems to be a suggestion for a community process, rather than a technical change. Is there a specific change you would like to see to MediaWiki software to enforce this limit in some way? Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 11:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I guess the way this could be helped technically would be a feature so that any new article could automatically have some "Created in the last hour" or "New article" notice that would inform readers and patrollers alike with users having to tag and de-tag. Option to set duration and configure message/format would be required. KylieTastic (talk) 11:15, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yes,it's more like that what i thaught Owee mªthias (talk) 12:09, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Owee mªthias Could you update the wish description fields above to clarify this? It's the section that will be translated so it will be helpful to clarify there so that voters understand what they're voting on. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 09:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the description per the above. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 10:38, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, the way to do it is to work on an early-stage article in your user space or in draftspace rather than create an article in mainspace. For example, your draft fr:Trash(Youtube) was moved to fr:Utilisateur:Owee mªthias/Brouillon where you have more time to work on it. Fayenatic london (talk) 14:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Draft namespace is only in some wikis. Sandbox is one of solutions, but sometimes user need to work in main namespace because of wikidata connection. But this is probably not problem of newbies, their problem is not knowing about {{inuse}}. JAn Dudík (talk) 10:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you're talking about articles in Wikipedia, there is already a template called Under Construction that can notify any readers to not edit the page in order to avoid edit conflicts. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 20:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

Oppose Seems to be a Wikipedia-only problem; the deletion processes of each individual wiki should be handled locally. --SHB2000 (talk | contribs) 22:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tgr (talk) 01:46, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Templates exist for this purpose. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 02:53, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is yet another proposal that is trying to solve a fundamentally social problem through technical means. That won't work. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 03:38, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the {{inuse}} template satisfies this need. Article deletion can be contested in case a genuine article is deleted by speedy deletion and/or community consensus is enough to decide the fate of the article if it reaches the AfD venue. Raydann (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Raydann: That template is for major edits to an existing article. It's not for an article created five minutes ago. That's what sandboxes and drafts are for. One would think you would have known that. I guess not. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 07:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Learning from the best. Raydann (talk) 02:04, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - likely unnecessary. New articles should in theory be no less unreliable than old articles. If there is a problem, or if it is still under construction, local wikis have ways to manage these. Anarchyte (talk) 06:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Anrchyte: Yeah, it's called sandboxes and drafts. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 07:37, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose --Jim Hokins (talk) 08:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Using sandboxes and drafts solve this issue as they are there for the proposed solution. (Drafts will be deleted after a certain period of inactivity, so best to use your sandbox until ready). Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 09:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose CaféBuzz (talk) 09:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose SunDawn (talk) 12:36, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lupe (talk) 13:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are resolutions to the problem like Draft namespace and user sandboxes. Thingofme (talk) 13:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of the best ideas. Heterotrofo (talk) 21:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think it's necessary, but if a community does decide it is this is a policy issue that can be addressed locally by creating a template that attaches to any article created by a user with >n edits. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 06:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC) already established solutions available
Support Leo067 (talk) 08:39, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I had the same problem, made my first article and Admin rushed to delete it, lost 50' of work because of "edit conflict". Also, "sandboxes" and "drafts" are the solution only if you accept to further complicate the article creation: for me it is better to have one stub more than no article at all. FranzXYZ (talk) 08:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --cyrfaw (talk) 11:25, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~Cybularny ^Speak? 13:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It would support SPAM edits in order to have the page indexed on Google and other search engines. Ruthven (msg) 15:29, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No, sandboxes are enough. --——d—n—f (fr.-sysop) (talk) 08:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A person with less notability should also get a chance to list on Wikipedia. Stardustnite (talk) 08:44, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This would be a good thing. Kalesh (talk) 09:00, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bilykralik16 (talk) 01:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is a great idea. Especially for the fact that I use RTRC in viewing recent edits, I have to open a page history to verify whether it is newly created or not. I therefore support if the fact that I can see newly created articles right before I even open the page. I support this proposal Uncle Bash007 (talk) 04:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to use mw:XTools/ArticleInfo.js, which shows the age and creation date of a page below its title. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --FoBe (talk) 14:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support First time readers should no about the article if it is recently created
Homolego (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: this seems like feature creep. There are technical solutions like templates (en:Template:In use), user sandboxes, and draft namespaces. There are also policy/guideline solutions such as adding guidance to admins and patrollers about time to deletion. For example, in English Wikipedia, new page reviewers wait for some time before nominating a new article for deletion, unless it's blatant vandalism or spam. MarioGom (talk) 18:23, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Libertyguy (talk) 21:27, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captain Almighty Nutz (talk) 01:57, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bass-Kuroi (talk) 04:03, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Packerfan386 (talk) 09:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is wiki-specific, intrudes on policy rather than being a purely technical feature, and half the supports on here don't list valid reasoning (what on earth does "A person with less notability should also get a chance to list on Wikipedia." have to do with this?) Blue Edits (talk) 10:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support 我支持此提案。 --维基佛祖 (talk) 23:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Serieminou (talk) 22:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- I really think that this is a very good idea. -- Manjiro91💬 12:09, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Pppery. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]