Some analysis conducted on February 12th, 2021 using the search [1].
- [2] I would consider this a successful edit request. Although the edit request is gigantic, ERW helped the user delineate their points
- [3] Fail. Incorrect use of template.
- [4] A successful example. Helps user explain their request
- [5] Mixed results. The editor mistakenly put the request on their user talk page, but at least they provided an explanation using that field of the wizard
- [6] Request is vague, but at least they provide explanations
- [7] Did not use suggested fields
- [8] Did not use suggested fields, but to their credit, the request was pretty trivial
- [9] Successful edit request
- [10] Successful edit request (I also think this shows errors in the reviewing process)
- [11] Not using suggested fields but the request itself looks to be solid
- [12] Successful edit request (was suggesting promotional change, but at least it was formatted and explained adequately)
- [13] Successful use of form
- [14] Successful in use of form
- [15] Successful use of form
- [16] Erroneously requested a page move
- [17] Failed to use suggested fields
- [18] Actually implemented. Successful use of template.
- [19] Vague request, but correct use of template
- [20] Way too promotional, but at least they added citations
- [21] Erronously requesting page move
- [22] Basically requesting removal of advert-esque sections. Was accepted, but could have easily been denied
- [23] Incorrect use of template
- [24] Incorrect use of template
- [25] Correct use of template.
- [26] Incorrect use of template. Way too vague.
- [27] Kind of ok request even though the template wasn't followed exactly.
- [28] Successful use of template, incorrect use of request in general
- [29] Successful edit request. Implemented
- [30] Successful use of template.