I know this might not be the right place for this topic, but it’s getting a little annoying at this point.
Wolf_1234 continuously makes articles - ones with bad structure, grammar, and recently, some about selling/buying wolves (which in the US is illegal - if it’s a pure wolf) - his articles never state whether he means pure or wolfdog. This is about the fifth time I’ve come across a similar article by him with the same issues. I have messaged him before pointing out some things to improve. I don’t know if he’s receptive or if he is a troll. I don’t know.
Also, please, someone give me a pointer. Should I nominate this for deletion or put it under QR or just stub it and move on? Remember, this is like the fifth article by him (even after pointers) that are the same.
Hi @Authenticity
,
For all situations you find yourself in, not just this one, it’s important to assume good faith
, in accordance with wikiHow guidelines. This is to make sure wikiHow remains a peaceful and civil community.
In this case, this would probably mean sending another coaching message, preferably personalized so you can more easily connect with the editor in question. Give a specific example, such as the article you took a screenshot of here, and explain what in particular needed improving on the article. For example, you could explain that the articles need to state whether it is referring to pure wolves or wolfdogs, and be sure to explain why (selling and buying pure wolves is illegal in the US).
However, if you prefer, you could use a template. A coaching one such as {{test}} or {{warning}} should do the trick.
If the situation escalates further, or the editor doesn’t respond to coaching, may I redirect you to the wikiHow Administrator Notice Board
? A report under the Miscellaneous tab would likely be in order if this happens, since they don’t seem to be a blatant vandal or spammer.
8 Likes
So would I be fine categorizing it as [[Category:Quality Review]]?
1 Like
( Side note: wikiMarkup doesn’t work on Discourse, sorry. I learned that one the hard way too.
)
I believe NABers typically only add the Quality Review category. However, placing an {{attention}} tag on the article and specifying the reason on the Discussion page would be acceptable, I think.
4 Likes
The Quality Review is added when an article is demoted by a New Article Booster - adding it manually doesn’t actually do anything.
I’ll take a look at the situation and come back to this thread afterwards, but I’m not all that worried.
5 Likes
That’s what I thought, tried demoting an article once before it went through NAB, added the quality review category, and learned the hard way.
( I think it’s safe to assume I learned a lot of wikiHow-related things the hard way.
)
No problem. Always happy to assist.
All right, after looking at this, I second what Jaeden said about assuming good faith. The editor is new, and the articles aren’t in bad faith - they would need a lot of work to go live, but they can theoretically be viable topics. (We have an article on how to own a pet wolf, after all.) It’s really important to treat editors like they’re not here to cause trouble, even if their actions seem like they’re not fully in good faith at first, because accusing someone of trolling actually tends to backfire and is more likely to make them want to troll!
It’s also important to remember that just because something is illegal in the US (or wherever you live, really) doesn’t mean we can’t host an article on it. nfd|ill is for articles on subjects that are illegal everywhere
- like robbing someone or committing murder. Buying or selling a wolf doesn’t fit that criteria.
In these cases, I placed nfd|acc on the articles and demoted them. In a week, boosters and admins will vote on whether to keep them and can be fixed up in the meantime if someone chooses to rescue them.
If you’re not sure what to say to an editor, a lot of article tags also function as Talk page templates - for instance, if you NFD an article, putting the NFD template on the person’s Talk page will generate a message saying their article was NFD’d for whatever reason you applied. There are other tags like {{acc}}, {{copyedit}} and {{format}} that also leave a message. (You can check whether something leaves a message by previewing.)
I’d recommend reading through How to Coach Someone on wikiHow
if you haven’t already, and watching how other experienced editors coach other users who are doing similar things. It’s also a good idea to just stick with one message at first and then wait to see if they respond to it or if they keep doing the same things; multiple messages or really lengthy messages can end up being overwhelming to new users and frighten them off.
And if someone really does seem like they’re here to cause trouble - like vandalizing articles - and isn’t receptive to coaching, report them on the Administrator Notice Board, and an admin can look into it.
9 Likes
My thoughts exactly @anon74718567
. I was considering doing an nfd on the article for being illegal, but then I had second thoughts because it actually isn’t illegal in the majority of the world’s countries, I think.
2 Likes
Ok I guess u can just assume his/her gender and also in some states it’s not illegal to own or buy a pet wolf
Er… if I offended you I’m sorry? I realized I made a mistake with the wolves thing (since people are from different countries/states). I’ll admit, I’m just used to saying “he” to refer to people, whether or not I know their gender.
Ok yeah but I do agree
that the article was not really the best at it didn’t have enough info and it did have bad grammarR
This has already been resolved, so I’m going to lock this thread, but feel free to message me on my Talk page if you have further questions
2 Likes
