First of all, I would like to point out that there are four times as many requests out now as there are articles. That is why I am proposing a new tool. Request Guardian will take you through several random requests. You will read the titles of each request, and get three options of action: -Skip -Write Article -Nominate for Termination Skip, likely the most common choice, will merely take you to the next randomly generated suggestion, much like Patrolling or QG. Write Article, likely the least common choice, will take you to the editing screen so that you can write the article. After the article is written, the request will automatically be removed. Nominate for Termination will be the final choice. If you suspect the article name is a duplicate or does not match wikiHow criteria, you can press this button to submit your opinion. If, say, three people have hit this button on the same suggestion, and no one has written the article yet, it will be removed from suggestions. This system is obviously imperfect, and I am making this proposition even though I know nothing about the creation of new tools, nor do I know how we can handle so many suggestions. In the meantime, there should at least be a way to stop people from making new suggestions for a short period of time, a way to get old suggestions that no one has looked at out of the queue, and to inspire editors to write new, good-quality articles. If you support, oppose, or have suggestions for this idea, don’t hesitate to post.

This is a good idea.

Thank you. Any suggestions?

A Yes button so the request can get kept. This is also a good idea because when the admins and boosters are done testing, we’ll have something to vote on.

A yes button? As in an opposition for termination WITHOUT writing the article? Well, I can see how that would work, but I don’t think it would help anything. If you meant something else by “Yes button”, could you please elaborate?

Is it really that hard in researching and spending time on creating an article? I’m really confused why people are so anti towards the suggested request list :\

There are 450,000 or so article requests. It would take even our best editors an insanely long amount of time to write all of these articles, especially considering that some of them have joke titles. Even more troubling - sometimes, when you write an article that is on the request list, it still remains there. That is why I am proposing this tool to get rid of superflous and ridiculous requests, and keep the good ones (or even turn them into good articles).

NABers and admins have a suggestion managing tool where they can choose toilet the request go into the queue, or delete it from the queue. Theycan also change the title of the request from it. (So I’ve heard…)

The only problem is, this feature is NAB/admin only. There needs to be a more controlled method of handling suggestions, and if anyone can use QG, then they should be able to use RG.

Bump for those interested in raising a rally for unanswered/superflous requests.

Nice! But what if an article has a title that suggests a good topic, but doesn’t meet the title policy? (ex: How to be super cute)

The article will be voted for deletion, and any interested authors will create an article (non-request) with a similar title. No harm done.

Good idea.

Thank you.

I like the idea but take out the termination bit an i’m in

The termination bit? That means we get rid of requests that can’t be written, such as “How to How to Choose the Best Mango”, or “How to Capital of Switzerland”. Get the idea?

Couldn’t we just have, “Change Title”? for a button? Some requests are good, but with a poor title.

I can see how that would work, but why not just write an article with that title rather than picking it up from requests?

I’d see how it really could go either way, but if you improved the request title then you could technically, write an article with a good title and answer a request. I can see how it doesn’t matter too much, however.

My only problem with a “Change Title” feature is that someone could change the title to something completely random. If a request were to have an inaccurate title, it would have to be voted for termination. The main goal here is to clear all of the superflous requests, but we have to answer some of the good ones at the same time. For people who are indecisive when it comes to certain requests, there is always the skip button. I don’t know if this should be implemented, but it would certainly get us out of stormy weather.