Wikipedia:New pages patrol

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Thank you for your interest in becoming a New Page Reviewer. Reviewing new pages is the one of the most important single maintenance tasks on the whole site. It's what keeps bad pages out, and equally important, it gives a boost to new, good faith users creating their first genuine articles. Reviewing new pages needs a thorough knowledge of deletion and notability guidelines. Once you've read this tutorial, please consider applying for the permission.

New Page Review is a vital function as the front line of interaction between new authors and community members devoted to policing the quality of the project. It has a variety of detailed, quite complex possible actions for patrolling pages in all namespaces. Only New Page Reviewers can mark pages as 'Reviewed' or 'Patrolled' which releases them for indexing by search engines. Any reviewing action done through the page curation toolbar by a reviewer marks an article as reviewed (adding maintenance tags, nominating for deletion, etc.). If you don't want the article marked as reviewed, you can unreview it by opening the review panel and clicking "Mark as unreviewed".

Basic flow chart

If you are new to New Page Reviewing, it is essential that you also read Page Curation Help, view its video tour and read WP:FIELD. Reviewing needs a near-admin knowledge of deletion and notability policies.

It is important to review correctly and seriously. The volume of articles created is immense. Even a few percentage points more of erroneous or bitey reviewing can adversely affect hundreds of articles or deter many new users a day. It is critical that editors don't review sloppily nor treat it as a game or contest.

Reviewing is entirely voluntary and carries no obligation.

Watch a quick video tour
New Pages Feed screenshot

Tools: Unlike other web sites, blogs and forums, Wikipedia already puts powerful editing tools at the hands of all readers and users. New pages review is our first line of defense against unwanted pages or for quick, on-the-fly improvement of poorly written or constructed pages and it must be done accurately. Some useful reviewing tools can automate parts of the process. The Page Curation tool, launched in September 2012 after a year of analysis and development in direct collaboration with the Wikimedia Foundation, combines the New Pages Feed with a dedicated tagging, messaging, and logging system for routine reviewing. It replaces Twinkle for new page reviewing, which nevertheless provides tagging and deletion tools (as well as other tools useful for general maintenance) for pages that do not show in the New Pages Feed. New page reviewers have the option of using a user script that combines the two main Page Curation features, namely the Special:NewPagesFeed and the curation toolbar. The old Special:NewPages feed can be accessed using this script.

Tools such as Huggle and Stiki are specifically designed for counter-vandalism and are fine for vandalism patrollers; they should never be used for reviewing new pages.

If you have a question or concern, post a message at the New Page Reviewer Talk, and an experienced reviewer or editor will be along soon to help you. For other help using the tools, see the related tabs above.

The purpose of reviewing new pages

The Page Curation process is for identifyiing articles which do not meet the criteria for inclusion and/or to tag them for attention. Most critical are vandalism, obvious hoaxes, and copyright violations and defamatory material about living persons, followed closely by pages that exploit Wikipedia for money. Other pages need to be deleted for other reasons but may be less urgent – unpatrolled pages are not indexed by Google or other search engines.

A tool developed by a user enables reviewers to move to the Draft namespace any new articles that, while not being suitable for immediate publication, might be accepted if the creator has more time for development. The tool, Move to Draft, should be installed by reviewers in their .js page. Note: This tool is to be used with discretion, it is not a catchall for not knowing what to do with a new page.

Reviewers are encouraged to make frequent use of the existing message to creator tool. It is essential that new creators are encouraged to continue with their acceptable new articles.


New Page Review is essentially the first (and only) firewall against totally unwanted content and the place to broadly accept articles that may not be perfect but do not need to be deleted. Reviewers are not obligated to mentor new users or complete their articles, but may wish to direct new users to the Teahouse question forum, help desk and Articles for Creation for assistance. Wikipedia:Your first article, Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, the Wikipedia:Tutorial, The Wikipedia Adventure, and other help pages are also available. When drafts are approved at AfC and moved to the mainspace they will be checked again at Curation. Some regular reviewers from the AfC team also have New Page Reviewer flag because they have related expertise.

Do not be too hasty to nominate contributions by new editors for deletion if the content is marginally poor. If you are uncertain, leave the page unpatrolled, and another volunteer can review it later.

Care should be exercised when reviewing very new pages. Tagging anything other than attack pages, copyvios, vandalism or complete nonsense only a few minutes after creation may stop the creation of a good faith article and drive away a new contributor.

Reviewers must fully understand Wikipedia's deletion policy and remember it. A page can only be speedy deleted only if it meets one of the strict criteria. From the policy:

Before nominating a page for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved, reduced to a stub, merged or redirected elsewhere, reverted to a better previous revision, or handled in some other way. A page is eligible for speedy deletion only if all of its revisions are also eligible. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors.

If a reviewer thinks a page should be deleted, but it is not a candidate for speedy deletion, AfD, PROD or WP:BLPPROD must be used instead. Spurious nominations for speedy deletion, even if the article is later deleted at AfD, are damaging to Wikipedia and may quickly result in the reviewer losing their 'reviewer' flag.

If the page is not a candidate for deletion but has other problems, add appropriate tags and use the message feature of the curation tool to inform the creator of the issues (see the patroller checklists section below for more information).

User names and vandalism

In serious cases, the creator of a new page may need to be blocked to prevent further disruption or damage to Wikipedia's reputation. Familiarise yourself with the WP:UAA and WP:AIV systems and their policies and report such cases as necessary.

Wikipedia forensics

Page reviewers are in a good position to detect policy breaches such as sockpuppetry, promotion, serial copyright violations, undisclosed paid editing, and Child protection issues. Learn about these policies and what to do. For example, check the content of new articles for inline external spam links.

Your patrol log and Watchlist

Check your patrol log frequently for articles that you tagged for deletion but which are still blue linked - it could be that the creator or his sock has removed the PROD or CSD tag. You may also wish to set your Watchlist preferences to display all pages that you edit.

Monitoring the system

A New Page Reviewer is the second set of eyes. Remember that page tagging can still be carried out by any user. Although they don't have access to the features of New Pages Feed, even IP users can tag pages. Tagged pages remain listed in the feed until patrolled by a reviewer, enabling New Page Reviewers to identify and isolate poor patrolling. Use the 'Unreview' feature for good faith errors and see the templates that can be used to encourage users to do less demanding maintenance tasks until they have more experience. Generally, Template 'Stop #1' is friendly enough and the effort is to be supportive rather than assertive. In persistent cases however, it will be necessary to escalate through the warning levels. At Level 4, a block is usually appropriate at the very next tagging. Preferably notify an admin. Only post a case at WP:ANI if no admin is available to stop a disruptive spree. See: User Warnings.


Unreviewed pages by keyword. This thematic grouping of unreviewed pages enables reviewers to patrol new articles according to their preferred areas of knowledge or interest. Additional tools are listed in the green collapsed section below.