Wikipedia talk:GAR

This is the discussion page for good article nominations (GAN), good article reassessment (GAR), and the good articles process in general. To ask a question or start a discussion about the good article nomination process, click the Add topic link above. Please check and see if your question may already be answered; click the link to the FAQ above or search the archives below. If you are here to discuss concerns with a specific review, please consider discussing things with the reviewer first before posting here.

ChristieBot error reporting -- where to look

I've recently made some changes to the way ChristieBot handles errors. Since I know there are some editors who help out by fixing various kinds of GAN error, here's a summary of how it is now supposed to work, and what can usefully be monitored. My hope is that this is a lot simpler and easier for editors to monitor than it used to be.

There are five different ways that errors can show up:

• Individual GAN entries on the main GAN page. Some issues will appear directly next to a nomination entry (in red text). These come from the {{GANentry}} template and may be further tweaked in the future. These usually indicate something editors can fix on that specific nomination.
• Article talk page. Thanks to Prhartcom, who has enhanced the {{GA nominee}} template, if there are errors in the GA nomination template they will now show up on the article talk page in bold red text. These are typically formatting or parameter issues that the nominator (or any editor) can correct. Note that you can also watchlist Category:GAN error to see these, since anything that creates an error in the GA nomination template will put the talk page that category.
• GAN errors page. User:ChristieBot/GAN errors will list all current nomination/template issues. These will be similar to the problems identified on the GAN page and the article talk page, per the above. If you're interested in helping fix GAN errors this is a good page to watch. For example, it will list nominations with missing or invalid parameters, and nominations in an inconsistent state. Note that the "Errors" section on the GAN page has been eliminated. All editor-facing errors should be listed on here; and if the edit summmaries on the main GAN page start with "Errors listed!", that will be a link to this page.
• ChristieBot bug messages page. User:ChristieBot/Bug messages will list internal bot errors (unexpected failures, database issues, etc.). These are not generally fixable by editors, but may be useful for awareness or reporting. Most editors will not find it useful to watch this.
• Operational status page. User:ChristieBot/Operational status will show a summary of the operational state. Sometimes there are temporary system issues that are not bugs or GAN errors; this page will (when possible) show the status. This page is transcluded onto ChristieBot's user page. This may be worth watching if you want to know, for example, why ChristieBot has not run in a few hours; this might tell you why.

This separation is intended to make it clearer which issues might benefit from editor attention and which are informational only. If you see any errors that don't fit this pattern, or if there are any questions, let me know; it's entirely possible I have not yet converted all the messages to fit this plan. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:23, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Mike Christie, thank you for improving the error handling and reporting in ChristieBot and honored to work with you on the GAN templates. OK, good plan: Watchlist Category:GAN error, User:ChristieBot/GAN errors, User:ChristieBot/Bug messages, User:ChristieBot/Operational status, as well as vigilance for any red text appearing on the main GAN page or on the article talk page. Prhartcom (talk) 21:08, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Pending GARs

@GAR coordinators:User:Lee Vilenski User:Trainsandotherthings User:Chipmunkdavis There are several GARs dating back to April which I cannot close. If someone could make a decision either way just to get them out of the queue, that would be great! Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:56, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Good article criteria/where necessary

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Good article criteria/where necessary. Qwerty123M (talk) 02:11, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

Tobey (song)

I see that @RTSthestardust: has just nominated for GA Tobey (song), which I brought to DYK. I'm already fairly familiar with the sources. There are certain things I'm not going to attempt during a heatwave, but hypothetically, could I review?--Launchballer 04:34, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

I don't think so - you have enough authorship/edits on that article to nominate it yourself. You're the second contributor by edits and by edit volume - actually, higher than RTSthestardust on the former. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 04:48, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Fair enough. (Saves me having to decide whether every single claim in the final paragraph needing {{independent source needed}} is enough to quickfail per "It has, or needs, [...] large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags"...) I've watchlisted Talk:Tobey (song)/GA1 anyway and suggest that @Dxneo: does the same.--Launchballer 05:11, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Haha! I didn't even see this. Thanks! dxneo (talk) 11:16, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

River Ivel

Should I submit the River Ivel article for GA or there should be more additions to the article? TheAnomynousEditor (talk) 18:06, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome to submit it if you think it meets the GA criteria. I can tell you at a glance that it doesn't yet meet MOS:LEAD (the lead should summarize the body of the article), and you'd have to fix that at least to meet the criteria. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 22:37, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Talk:The Joy of Sect/GA2

Can someone reset this one? I tried blanking it and pinging the bot, but I think it needs a G7 to reset. I didn't want to fail it to reset, but that may be the only way. I am not going to take this review after discussing with nom. Viriditas (talk) 22:40, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

I reset it on the article's talk page. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:44, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Also deleted. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:19, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Talk:Second Italo-Ethiopian War/GA1

I am concerned whether an editor with only a nominal editing history (less than extended confirmed) has sufficient knowledge and experience to assess an article. The subject article was assessed by HPGirl362 (contributions). Cinderella157 (talk) 23:19, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, we know that's not a satisfactory review, regardless of who the reviewer is. Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:28, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

I have vacated that review and reset the GAN. Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:17, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Talk:The Giant Spider Invasion/GA2

The reviewer has not edited in nearly a month and they were practically done with the review. I dunno if I need to get a second opinion at this point. GamerPro64 03:00, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Bot q

Hey - just approved a GA for Amadu Bansang Jobarteh, but bot doesn't appear to have noticed it yet. Is the delay normal or did I do something wrong in my inputs (this is my first GA review)? Jishara (talk) 04:41, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Jishara, thanks for taking on a review. A small delay is normal for most bot operations. Is there a particular one you are looking for? ChristieBot has taken it off the GAN list as passed. There is no need to manually edit Wikipedia:Good articles/recent, but it would be helpful if you could add the passed article to the relevant subsection of Wikipedia:Good articles/Music. Best, CMD (talk) 06:13, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

It's not working for Abdel Moneim al-Houni either. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:40, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Well, the reviewer OpalYosutebito has put a closing template on the GA review but has done none of the steps needed to pass the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:08, 1 July 2026 (UTC)