User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Differences between AFC and NPP reviewing

Are you an AFC reviewer that just got a trial run at NPP? Overall the two skillsets are very similar, but here's some things to watch out for.

Differences

Difference	NPP	AFC
WP:BEFORE	WP:BEFORE is always required to start a deletion process such as WP:AFD. A minimum WP:BEFORE should include a Google News and Google Books search, since those searches are the most likely to turn up reliable sources. If it's an academic topic, you should also do a Google Scholar search to check academic journal articles.	WP:BEFORE is usually only done for promising drafts. Most drafts that you decline will not receive a WP:BEFORE.
Draftification	Certain types of articles should be draftified. This is controversial, but the de facto draftification criteria in my opinion is currently 1) zero references or citations, 2) poor translations, 3) poor language or grammar to the point where it is not ready for mainspace, 4) obvious UPE/COI and hasn't gone through AFC yet, 5) notability is borderline, and you haven't been able to find enough sources, but you suspect sources exist to demonstrate notability and could be added by the article creator. Draftspace is optional. Do not draftify an article more than once. If there is any objection to draftification by any person, allow the article to be returned to mainspace, then use a different deletion process.	N/A
CSD "A" criteria	The CSD criteria starting with the letter "A" (Article) apply in this namespace and need to be checked, in addition to "G" criteria. You should make sure you are familiar with the most common "A" criteria, WP:A7, and also read up on WP:CCS.	Only CSD "G" criteria apply. "A" criteria should not be evaluated.
Scrutiny	Article will only be checked once, by you.	Article will be checked twice: by you at AFC, and then by an NPP.
1 hour wait	We cannot draftify, CSD, or AFD articles within the first hour of their creation, unless there is a serious problem with them such as G10 Attack Page. The author needs time to work on them. These articles are highlighted red in Special:NewPagesFeed to help identify them.	We can review a draft immediately, because the author has pressed the "submit" button, indicating that they are done working on it and are ready for a reviwer.

Other tips

• The NPP flowchart (see image at the right) is a very good document. Please familiarize yourself with it. CSD, notability, and title check are mandatory. The gnoming parts at the bottom (maintenance tags, stub tagging, categories, WikiProject tags) are optional.
• If you're unsure about an article, don't guess. Leave it in the queue for a more experienced reviewer.
• If you want to get better at notability, go take a break from NPP and go participate in AFDs instead. Pick a subtopic such as professors, go find the deletion sort for that subtopic, and read a bunch of open and closed AFDs for that subtopic. Once you are up to speed, start !voting in AFDs for that subtopic. A week later, pay attention to how those AFDs close. Compare your !votes to the closes. AFD is the ultimate source of truth for notability. Notability guidelines can get out of date and can lack nuance. Reading and calibrating using AFDs will get you up to speed.
• Don't be afraid to ask questions at WT:NPPR, on the NPP Discord, or at the user talk pages of top reviewers.
• You may mark your own AFC draft approvals as reviewed if you want. It's allowed. But you can also leave it in the NPP queue and let another NPP double check your work.
• Mark any article with an AFD tag as reviewed (after running a copyright check). AFD will decide its fate.
• Do not mark articles with CSD or PROD tags as reviewed. The editor could just remove the deletion tag.