Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/School/Materials

Materials[edit]

@CASSIOPEIA, Kudpung, Insertcleverphrasehere, and Rosguill:, as past or present NPP trainers I thought it might be useful to have a "secret" page where training materials we've created could be shared and re-used. If you have further content to add please do so. My plan is to ping new trainers to the existence of this page so as to make it a little harder than CVUA for potential trainees to find materials ahead of when we want to use it. Special thanks to Cass for 90% of the work here and for agreeing that this was a good idea. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:13, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a great idea, although as someone who only just started volunteering here I don't have any materials to provide at this time. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:21, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, is it really 7 years ago that I created this school? It doesn't seem to get used much. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:21, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requiring 5 barnstars?[edit]

Is it really appropriate to ask an editor going through this school to hand out 5 barnstars? I feel like this requirement is either going to result in handing out a bunch of not-quite-deserved barnstars at once, or else will require the student to spend an inordinate amount of time searching for editors deserving of a barnstar? If I were to rewrite this section from scratch, I would probably replace the requirement to give out 5 with a few short answer questions covering when it is or isn't appropriate to hand out a barnstar, and then require them to give out a single such reward. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:50, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill it is up you the number of barnstarts or not not to ask the question at all. The point here is to give thanks/acknowledge to the contributions of the editors. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:45, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright task instructions[edit]

I'm not sure I understand what is meant by 7. Could this image-3 downloaded in C:Main Page and use in Wikipedia?. Specifically, I don't follow what "downloaded in C:Main Page" is supposed to mean in this context. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging CASSIOPEIA for this and the section above as they developed those materials. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 06:17, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill - C-main is Wikipedia Common (click the link and it will lead you there). Should be "Could this image be uploaded to C:Main). Corrected. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:47, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SNG Sorting[edit]

Hi there. Looking to use mix-in more of these "exam" questions for the first time with a trainee (as opposed to the exclusively hands-on approach I've used in the past). For the SNG sorting assignment what is an example of an SNG that would fall in the "Even mix of the two"? I have normally viewed SNGs as either additive to the GNG (NPROF) or "shortcut" to GNG (what NSPORT is supposed to be). Having this third category is tripping me up a little and am trying to understand the intent. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:06, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barkeep49, I think NFILM and and NNUMBER fall under the third category; NFILM is mostly category 1, but the "principal photography" requirement is more of a category 2 restriction (e.g., consider a film that has received a lot of buzz but has not begun filming). NNUMBER has a mix of limiting what sorts of coverage should be considered, while also specifying shortcuts, although FWIW I can't remember the last time I actually came across an article where NNUMBER was relevant. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:57, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill, thanks. I would want to think more about NFILM but yeah that explanation makes sense for NNUMBER. Out of curiosity where do you put your NPP school pages? I did a brief attempt to find them and didn't come up successful. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:01, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barkeep49, I've put them as child pages of the editor being tutored. You can find the list of editors I've tutored on my user page, although the links there just go to their user page, not the sub page. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 02:16, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Trainer Pinging[edit]

Utopes and Atsme you might find this collection of resources helpful for any students you enroll. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:10, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barkeep49 - I have no doubt

but may I ask to which collection of resources you refer? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Atsme, the project page for which this is a talk page Wikipedia:New pages patrol/School/Materials. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:36, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

...but I have an excuse - I'm on island time which slows brain function. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 15:41, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipediaing while on vacation is always dangerous. You have my sympathies :). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any students enrolled at this time, but it will be helpful knowing where these materials are, so I appreciate the ping. Cheers, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 17:44, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: Welcome to the list of trainers. The page here can help you run a good school for any students who might come through. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Barkeep49, thanks. Will try my best. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:25, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of NPP School[edit]

On my user talk Yngvadottir expresses some concerns, stemming from the current RfA, about New Page Patrol school. I think they present some interesting thoughts and critiques and I bring them up here for consideration. Any thoughts on how we might want to adjust/add to our curriculum? Pinging all current teachers: @Rosguill, Atsme, Cassiopeia, Insertcleverphrasehere, and Utopes:. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:35, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that we have more of a rubric than a program right now. There's a lot of useful tests in there for building and testing various skills (and a few questions that I don't find as useful), but it doesn't magically turn editors into good new page reviewers by itself. If we're concerned about the deletion tagging tests disrupting the encyclopedia, we could replace those sections with copies of text from articles (or just reflists in some scenarios) and ask editors to judge the content. It would take a bit of work, but it would be doable for everything except copyvio.

A change that I recently added to the article is a section dedicated to identifying reliable sources. I didn't have tons of examples on hand so it's worded to be about publications, but should probably have questions added to ask students to evaluate individual articles, and could stand to be a lot longer. I don't think that the baseline course does enough to teach editors about this. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 05:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have made my comment of the incident here and I have to say it is extremely disappointing to know that. I dont think it is the issues of the NPPS program but the involved participant blaming on NPPS instead of owing up their responsibility/mistake. Many editor have been granted new page patrol rights without going through NPPS and claiming their have read all the necessary guidelines as indicated in the "request for NPP reviewer page" and made many mistake knowingly or unknowly when nominated CSD/AfD. The NPPS program is quite comprehensive as I am the one who initially set them up. The whole point is to get the participants understand the basics and then working on the applications. The numbers of questions were set to ensure the participant would have good enough of exercises to work on their topics required but no time limit as when the participant should answer them. As I am also one of the CUVA trainers, I do at times ask the participants to provide example prior their doing the actual CUVA work to make sure they understand the the guidelines and how to apply them if I think the particular participants do need extra help, they are not reading the material provide or just dont quite understand the guidelines and its application, and this can be applied to NPPS as well. Btw Rosguill, the initial program do have a section (assignment on source and reliable source is one of the section of the assignment. Cassiopeia^(talk) 08:13, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On the tangent of source reliability, yes I'm aware of that, I've run several editors through it. I don't think that that section adequately prepares editors for dealing with sources they've never heard of or non-English sources. I think that it's a good introduction to the concept of secondary vs primary sources for editors that are unfamiliar, but I don't think it's enough for teaching editors how to evaluate sources that they have never seen before. I've seen editors ace that section and then turn around and pratfall in their first few real AfDs _signed,Rosguill ^talk 15:36, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rosguill for the comments above, I see your point on non English sources even thought the treatment/evaluation on the sources are the same of that of English sources. Adding a sub section of identifying non English reliable source would be a good idea. Cassiopeia^(talk) 02:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting feedback. I'm certainly willing to consider options to my program which is currently aimed at a well-rounded understanding of relative PAGs, notability and RS, as well as behavior. I have always tried to stress no deadlines, take your time, ask questions. I also make the deletion process one of the most important processes, and the level at which I emphasize problem areas depends on the respective trainee, and my personal take on their attitude and cognitive abilities; therefore, I have no quotas or time restraints. I also watch their editing for a few weeks after they are granted the right. Atsme 💬 📧 12:48, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is probably the right answer: putting in some stronger language in a few places for the student to take their time. Dovetails nicely with "quality over quantity" which is obviously an NPP mantra. I'll circle back to do that this week if someone hasn't already. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:10, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just added this language for places where I see editors working on live pages rather than for scenarios/book questions. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Lennon[edit]

In 3.2, anyone have an objection to my removing this section? All the links are dead. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:56, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We should replace it with another clunker of an example. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:56, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]