Wikipedia:Using sandboxes for article changes

This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

This page in a nutshell: If you prepare article updates in a sandbox, don't surprise article watchers with a single massive rewrite.

Editors working on extensive or complex changes to articles sometimes prefer to work in a "sandbox" away from the affected article. The most common places for this are their "My sandbox" page or a userspace draft.^[a] Working in a sandbox can give an editor room to perfect their changes without the fear that an incomplete change will be reverted or exposed to readers of the article. For complex changes (such as re-organizing an article's structure) or on articles that are high-profile or controversial, use of a sandbox may reduce the social and psychological pressures of editing. However, introducing large changes from a sandbox can also have downsides. Large changes may take other editors by surprise, leading to negative reactions. In areas of controversy, some may get an impression that an editor is working in secret, then springing changes on other editors as a fait accompli. This essay gives advice on how to use sandboxes for article updates in ways that minimize disruption and conflict.^[b]

If you plan to do a rewrite or expansion in a sandbox, the following practices can help:

• Give prior notice of your intention on the article's Talk page, so that page watchers can be aware of what is happening. Similar notice might be given to relevant WikiProject pages.
• When you create your sandbox, attribute any content you copy from the current version of the article. See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for full details. Also tag your new sandbox page as a {{userspace draft}} and make sure it doesn't contain anything that should only be in article space, such as non-free content or article-specific categories.^[c]
• Transfer changes from the sandbox to main space in installments, rather than in a single edit. For example, change a few sentences or paragraphs at a time. This approach makes it easier for other editors to digest and interpret the changes. Diffs for extensive changes can be difficult to interpret.
• In addition to doing multiple edits for the transfer, it is also advisable to spread them out over time, so other editors have the opportunity to see the changes and react to individual edits rather than a massive change in a very short period.
• When the rewrite is complete, invite comments on the Talk page, and leave the revised text mostly unchanged for a time. If there are no substantial comments, revisions or reverts after several weeks, it is reasonable to believe that other editors have accepted your edits.
• For changes you expect to be controversial, apply the preceding three points even more carefully. Transfer smaller, more incremental changes and give more time for other editors to react.
• When your major changes seem stable, you might seek other feedback, such as a peer review, or submit the article for formal review as a Good Article, Featured Article, or Featured List, if you believe it meets the criteria for those statuses.
• Assume good faith at every stage. If an editor raises objections to the changes you are transferring from your sandbox, you should engage with their concerns as you would with normal editing.

Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).