In order to raise and uphold the quality of Good articles, we need to ensure that articles tagged and listed as Good articles meet the criteria. The easiest possible way to do this is the long lost process of sweeping. Basically, take a sub-category at WP:GA and review the articles. Take appropriate action, as listed below, and mark the sweep list when that sub-cat is completed.
Due to the fact that sweeps have not been conducted thoroughly before, we will be checking all listed articles in the first round of sweeps. However, mathematics, physics, and chemistry articles will be reviewed by experts in those respective fields.
For this initial sweep, all Good articles listed need to be reviewed against all GA criteria. Because everyday new GA are listed, we will be using this stabliized version as the established version where the Sweeps will be based on.
Review the articles against the criteria as you would an article listed at WP:GAN or WP:GAR.
If an article clearly fails to meet the criteria—which will be the case for many articles promoted prior to the creation of criteria in 2006—boldly delist the article by removing it from WP:GA and leave a message on the article talk page using {{GABoldDelist}} with a detailed list of issues below it.
If the article is questionable or appears to fail, but you are not comfortable delisting it, nominate it for review at Good article reassessment.
Minor issues which can easily be addressed should either be listed on the article talk page or boldly corrected during your review. Give editors seven days to address issues. Be sure to keep up with articles that are "put on hold" (so to speak, don't tag as on hold).
Once you've completed a subcategory, update the Last article quality sweep field on the sweep list with your signature.
Talk page messages
Below are examples of messages that can be left on the article talk page. These are only example, each reviewer is free to customize their own messages, of course. However, be sure to include all relevant links, including the link to WP:GAPQ. Also be as courteous as possible in your messages.
Pass
==GA Sweeps (Pass)==
This article has been reviewed as part of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force]]. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a [[WP:GA|Good article]]. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, ~~~~
On hold
==GA Sweeps (on hold)==
This article has been reviewed as part of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force]] in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the [[WP:WIAGA|Good article criteria]]. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed. [Insert detailed list of issues here.] I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a [[WP:GA|Good article]]. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through [[WP:GAR]]). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at [[WP:GAN]]. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, ~~~~
==[[WP:GAR|Good Article Reassessment]]==
This article has been reviewed as part of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force]]. I question the quality of this article based on the [[WP:WIAGA|Good article criteria]]. For that reason, I have listed the article at [[WP:GAR|Good article reassessment]]. Issues needing to be address are listed there. Regards, ~~~~
Considering the entire point of this task force is to improve and uphold the quality of Good articles, only experienced reviewers who are established (trusted) within the project should participate in this initial sweep. It is key that substandard articles be weeded out while those that are almost there are improved. The point is to target articles that have "fallen through the cracks", so we can't have any fall through the cracks during this.
Awards
Quality is the goal here. For that reason, awards will be given out based on the quality of reviews, not solely on quantity. What awards will be given out will not be known until the sweep is completed. Reviews should be done for the betterment of the project and the encyclopedia, not for a star... But you'll still get a star (maybe something better) if you make a significant impact during the sweeps.
