Wikipedia:Newbie treatment at Criteria for speedy deletion/WereSpielChequers

Articles by ϢereSpielChequers

Mago II of Carthage

So far its been up for approx half a week, but not yet marked as patrolled. I think if it survives the week unpatrolled I may let the test run on to see if it survives the editors who patrol the back end of the newpages list. The new author has not yet been welcomed either. ϢereSpielChequers 09:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Article has now survived the seven days, so met the challenge. However it hasn't been patrolled or wikified, and the author hasn't been welcomed. So I'm going to let the experiment run to see how it fares at the other end of the new page patrol process. ϢereSpielChequers 11:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

After being totally unnoticed for 30 days, the article came to the end of the unpatrolled list of new pages on the 5th November and received a sudden flurry of attention:

1. first Dawn Bard tagged it as {{tl:unsourced}}
2. 3 hours later Ironholds wikified the categories
3. 4 minutes later still Vinithehat linked it tagged it with {{tl:history-stub}} and I suspect marked it as patrolled

So to sum up, how would user:dahsun be feeling if he was truly a newbie? His article Mago II of Carthage, passed both tests, surviving without being tagged for deletion or being deleted. It does confirm my suspicion that the back of the unpatrolled queue crew are a more thoughtful inclusionist bunch than those who sup from the firehouse at the front of the new pages queue. But our newbies talkpage is still red. ϢereSpielChequers 20:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Gotta tell you, I lourve the front of the queue. It is very satisfying deleting page after page of articles about who has the "world's biggest, most awesome penis" or what High School is full of losers. But I pay the price for this deletionst orgy by hacking away at those oddball articles that look redundant or halfway good/bad and try to decide what is a good fate for them. I considered tagging it for delettion, but realized that if someone were to only know of Mago II, they might want to know about the rest of his dynasty. A topic of note is of note because of the element of the topic, I suppose. I forgive your deception in the name of science. Vinithehat (talk) 01:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Vini. I'm not disputing that there is a huge stream of crud pouring in as new articles that need deleting - I've deleted nearly 3,000 articles so far this year and I suspect most of those were tagged by new page patrollers. But this test was for the articles that should get through the queue, and this was a good example - a head of state is a pretty strong claim of importance or significance. ϢereSpielChequers 10:08, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Himilco II of Carthage

I've now used the same account to create a second article, this was patrolled immediately but without any wikification or other amendment. However it certainly passed the two minute challenge. The "newbie" still has a redlinked talkpage. ϢereSpielChequers 13:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

As a head of state Himilco II of Carthage was patrolled very quickly, but left woefully un wikified. The first edit to the article was by User:Alexbot after ten days - linking to the French Wikipedia article, which is a translation of this article. ϢereSpielChequers 10:16, 4 November 2009 (UTC)