Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback/Archive1

• I am very sorry to say it. It is horrible. Unusable. A newbie has no chance to use this. The wizard's design does not correspond to level of users whom it is intended for. They will get stuck unable to finish the first step. The design also does not fit into the whole Wikipedia making itself even more confusing. Miraceti (talk) 13:21, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

New article name here

A user just created an article with the page name New article name here. An experienced user then renamed the article, and New article name here was deleted within four minutes of the articles creation. The creator of the article was not informed of the move of the new article, and could easily have not been able to find it. If this happens again, could I suggest:

1. Informing the creator on his talk page of the whereabouts of his new article
2. Adding a message (if possible) to anyone moving or deleting New article name here to inform the article creator.

Martin451 (talk) 19:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it wouldn't hurt notifying the initial editor, but I'm sure they will find it anyway, either through their contributions or through Wikipedia search. Even if they went to New article name here directly, for some reason, they'd see where it went in the log. Amalthea 19:22, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

This is no longer an issue, as New article name here is now protected and an appropriate message shown. Rd232 ^talk 15:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Make the wizard more noticable

This wizard is invisible. We need to make it easier to find. --Josh (Mephiles602) 14:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

What do you suggest? It's linked from lots of welcome templates. See also my current proposal WP:VPR#autoconfirmed for unassisted article creation. Rd232 ^talk 14:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Is the "end" tab supposed to be on its own line? It looks awkward at the moment. I'd suggest making the tabs slimmer. If they're not showing up on one line on my 1280x800 resolution laptop, I'm sure hardly anyone is seeing them correctly. Most screens are not larger than that. hmwith☮ 20:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Should be working now down to 1024px window width, as a quick fix. Thanks, Amalthea 20:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Initial feedback

• I think it's not bad but could be better. I know I should give more helpful comments, sorry! :) User:Example 10:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

• Genius! 67.180.161.183 (talk) 16:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
• This is excellent and the word really should be spread (even if it is in beta). Nja²⁴⁷ 21:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
• Excellent tutorial and guide. Extremepro (talk) 10:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
• Well done. It would be nice if there were "article templates" for more experienced editors. For example I'm about to start a brand new disambiguation page. It would be great if I could select that as one of the options and the tool would take me to a template "example" page I could then convert into the article I'm about to create. Thanks. ~ Paul^T+/_C 07:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
• I loved it! --John (talk) 03:45, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
• I was reluctant to test it when not creating a real page, as it was not clear whether it was immediately going to create a real page in the main namespace. Cyclopaedic (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
• Good start! You might consider an option (at SAVE) to let the user move the proposed article to their namespace rather than go live right away (daunting for some no doubt). Another PLUS would be a really good WYSIWYG citation tool which checks format & completion then shows you what the resulting reference will look like before you save. Twang (talk) 01:54, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
• Interesting, but this is not what is usually referred to as a "wizard" by any means, i.e. something that assists you in *doing* something. It's simply a succession of "help"-type pages with instructions. The only difference from the regular article creation form is that it places templates for references, external links and categories at the bottom (a good idea, to be sure). So, a pretty good idea, might even be made compulsory for anonymous and new users at some point to discourage the creation junk articles – but definitely a misnomer. Jimmy Fleischer (talk) 09:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Really? (Wizard (software) doesn't obviously say that.) So what would you call it instead, or what changes would justify the term? Rd232 ^talk 12:08, 23 October 2009 (UTC)