User talk:Rusalkii/Archives/2022/September

Reviewing drafts

Hello, Rusalkii,

I don't think we've ever communicated before. I know you review drafts for AFC and one of my main activities is dealing with expiring drafts that haven't been edited in six months or longer.

Any way, I just came across a spree of drafts you reviewed, there were 9 drafts that you reviewed over 3 minutes! And that doesn't account for drafts that were later edited by draft creators so there might have been more than 9 drafts you reviewed. I'm concerned that you are declining drafts after giving them approximately 20 seconds of your time. I hope this rapid pace was an anomaly that occurred back in January and doesn't reflect your current practice. While it's often immediately obvious that some drafts aren't ready for main space, I think draft creators deserve a helpful response on how they can improve their work and more than just a standard template.

I realize that AFC is greatly backlogged and I appreciate all of your contributions to the project. I'm just a little concerned because often AFC reviewers are the first experienced editors that new editors encounter and I want to make sure that they can benefit from these meetings even if their drafts hold little promise of going beyond Draft space. Thanks again for all of your work for the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:23, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Liz, as you can see from the lateness of this reply that pace certainly does not reflect my current reviewing habits :)

More seriously, I think that for a first time rejection in sufficiently clear-cut cases, our form-letter responses without further commentary are fairly standard among reviewers. Whenever I see a second rejection, especially a second rejection without further improvement that seems to show that they understood the reason for the first one, I leave a more detailed comment.

That all being said, I think my pace when I started reviewing was in fact too fast, and part of the reason was that I was reviewing more drafts than was sustainable for me (I think at one point I was the most prolific reviewer of the month). My current editing patterns look more like reviewing maybe 5-6 drafts once every couple weeks, and that means that I can approach each draft with fresh eyes and am much more likely to write a personalized comment.

Thank you for taking the time to point this out to me, I really do appreciate it. Rusalkii (talk) 04:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Review my draft

Hello sir, please review my draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Asom_Barta Kongkon majulian (talk) 12:44, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Blocked as a sock. Rusalkii (talk) 04:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Evermore (Taylor Swift album) GAN

Hi @Rusalkii:! Greetings. I studied your suggestions and have responded/implemented the changes. Pinging you to let you know. Have a nice day. ℛonherry☘ 08:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Revision edit of a page

Hi, you reverted my changes to a page “Tim (or Tom) Woolgar”. I can’t see your full message but I believe it was because I didn’t cite a source. The source can be found on chessboxingnation.com or chessboxing.info

I wondered whether my edits can be reinserted.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheNorthernPowerhouse (talk • contribs) 08:38, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

@TheNorthernPowerhouse, your edit should still be in the history. Feel free to re-add it with the source, but note that content like "Tom “The Hippo” has never backed down from a fight!" is usually not something we want in Wikipedia's voice, we try to keep everything neutral. Rusalkii (talk) 19:05, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battery Park City, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eater.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear Audrey Draft for September 26, 2022

Hi Rusalkii, thank you for reviewing my Draft on Dear Audrey. I just wanted to let you know that I considered your feedback and made the required adjustments in the synopsis section. Let me know if there is something else I can do.

Best Regards, Veilleur-Bienveillant Veilleur-bienveillant (talk) 00:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

@Veilleur-bienveillant, looks like the copyright issues has been fixed. I usually don't re-review drafts, so you should get someone else looking over the draft, hopefully soon. Rusalkii (talk) 01:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Got it, thanks! Veilleur-bienveillant (talk) 11:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)