A new system to improve the efficiency of Wikipedia’s multi-stage review system is needed.
It is widely held that Wikipedia’s existing new page review was constructed in a hasty effort to prevent spam overwhelming the encyclopedia as the number of active reviewers decreased and the number of people with internet access and a desire to publish on Wikipedia increased.
The systematically implemented was a very simple review format. Newly created pages were logged by software as “unreviewed” on creation. Trusted Wikipedia users were allowed to mark the pages as “reviewed” if they considered them to be valid articles.
The system was refined over time, the reviewers were instituted in a special project, the reviewer right became restricted only to very experienced editors. A complex set of rules and review procedure was implemented. Eventually the backlog of unreviewed pages started to overload the project.
This led to the restriction of new page creation in a large scale six month trial, which was then made permanent. Now the majority of new pages are created as drafts, hidden from view and not indexed by search engines.
Refinements were made, the complex new page wizard was vastly simplified, a filter was implemented to stop hacks which made search engines index the drafts. All drafts that are not worked on for six months or more are deleted under a special criteria for deletion. An attempt to make promising drafts exempt from this was rejected.
The Articles for Creation WikiProject was implemented, equipped with advanced templates and a review script to enable a better workflow. The previous new page patrol system was retained and equipped with a script for the purpose.
The main difficulty faced by new editors is the notability guidelines, the main difficulty for reviewers is people writing about themselves or their company.
Now the question remains how to reform these stopgap solutions into a professional working system.