Wikipedia:WikiProject England/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject England! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to England. The article ratings are used within the project itself to aid in recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPE}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:England-related articles by quality and Category:England-related articles by importance.

Contents 1 Frequently asked questions 2 How to assess articles 2.1 Quality assessments 2.1.1 Quality scale 2.2 Priority assessment 2.2.1 Priority scale 2.3 Requesting an assessment

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How can I get my article rated? 

Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.

Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? 

Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.

What if I don't agree with a rating? 

You can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it. Alternately, you can ask any member of the project to rate the article again.

Who can assess articles? 

Any member of the England WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.

Where can I find articles to assess? 

Many articles in Category:England still need to be assessed and any articles in Category:Unassessed England-related articles and Category:Unknown-importance England-related articles.

If you have any other questions that aren't listed here, feel free to ask them at the talk page.

[edit] How to assess articles

You can assess articles by placing the {{WPE}} banner on its talk page (not the article page!) and using the two parameters, class (to assess the quality) and importance (to assess the priority).

[edit] Quality assessments

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPE}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WPE| ... | class=??? | ... }}

FA

A

GA

B

C

Start

Stub

???

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class England-related articles)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class England-related articles)
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class England-related articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class England-related articles)
• C (adds articles to Category:C-Class England-related articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class England-related articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class England-related articles)
• If there is no class defined, three question marks (???) will appear by default
  

FL

List

NA

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

• FL (for featured lists; adds pages to Category:FL-Class England-related articles)
• List (for lists; adds pages to Category:List-Class England-related articles)
• NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class England-related articles)
  

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed England-related articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

[edit] Quality scale

WikiProject article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]

Class	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA	The article has attained featured article status. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured article criteria: A featured article exemplifies our very best work and features professional standards of writing, presentation and sourcing. In addition to meeting the requirements for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes. It is— (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard; (b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; (c) well-researched: it is characterized by a thorough and representative survey of relevant literature on the topic. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported with citations; this requires a "References" section in which sources are listed, complemented by inline citations where appropriate; (d) neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and (e) stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of: (a) a lead—a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; (b) appropriate structure—a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents; and (c) consistent citations—where required by Criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes (<ref>Smith 2007, p. 1.</ref>) or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1) (see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references; for articles with footnotes, the meta:cite format is recommended). Images. It has images that follow the image use policies and other media where appropriate, with succinct captions, brief and useful alt text when feasible, and acceptable copyright status. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.	Tourette Syndrome (as of March 2009)
FL	The article has attained featured list status. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured list criteria: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; it is not a content fork, does not largely recreate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate through and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions and "alt" text if necessary. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.	Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available.	Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 3) (as of February 2009)
A	The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria The article meets the A-Class criteria: Shortcut: WP:A? Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history, WikiProject Films).	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting.	Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help.	Batman (1989 film) (as of October 2008)
GA	The article has attained good article status. More detailed criteria The article meets the good article criteria: Well-written: (a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation. Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout; (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; and (c) it contains no original research. Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia.	Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.	Usain Bolt (as of May 2009)
B	The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria The article meets the six B-Class criteria: The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. The use of citation templates such as {{cite web}} is not required, but the use of <ref></ref> tags is encouraged. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. The article has a defined structure.Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. The article is reasonably well-written.The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it certainly need not be "brilliant". The Manual of Style need not be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.	Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.	A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the manual of style and related style guidelines.	Jammu and Kashmir (as of September 2007)
C	The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.	Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.	Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues.	Exeter Cathedral (as of June 2008)
Start	An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria The article has a usable amount of good content, but it is weak in many areas, usually in referencing. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide enough sources to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.	Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more.	Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation.	Real analysis (as of November 2006)
Stub	A very basic description of the topic. More detailed criteria The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short, but if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category.	Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority.	Cuthwine (as of August 2008)
List	Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area.	There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader.	Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized.	List of aikidoka (as of June 2007)

[edit] Priority assessment

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WPE}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WPE| ... | importance=??? | ...}}

Top

High

Mid

Low

???

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

• Top - adds articles to Category:Top-importance England-related articles
• High - adds articles to Category:High-importance England-related articles
• Mid - adds articles to Category:Mid-importance England-related articles
• Low - adds articles to Category:Low-importance England-related articles
• Unknown - Any article not rated for importance is automatically added to the Category:Unknown-importance England-related articles.

[edit] Priority scale

Label	Criteria	Examples
Top	Articles with international recognition.	London
High	Articles with national recognition.	Sunderland
Mid	Articles with regional recognition (e.g. Suburbs).	Crumpsall
Low	Articles with local recognition.	A500 road

[edit] Requesting an assessment

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below.

Requested assessments

• English heraldry - nearly new, but only just got around to adding to this project. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 18:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
• Winston Churchill in politics: 1900-1939 Article recently created by Backnumber1662 LightAnkhC|MSG 11:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Its very incomplete, very much a 'work in progress' particularly re World war 1 its probably too early to rate it. Backnumber1662 (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• I totally rewrote Henry II of England about 2 months ago. Loads of fresh info and properly laid-out/referenced now. Can someone please rate it? thanks very much :) --Tefalstar 22:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
• North Sea has recently been translated from a Feature Article in German wikipedia, as well as the article was nominated for Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive and received a multitude of improvements. It is currently under peer review. SriMesh | talk 04:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• Manchester United F.C. requires an entire quality and importance assessment.
• Southampton has had a lot of work done and is on the cusp of being GA overall, so now needs assessment for this project.
• Allestree is one of the better articles of places in Derby. Could someone rate it please? Victuallers 02:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeh sure. Will assess it now. Makes sense doing WP:Derbys and all! Bluegoblin7 10:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Job done B Low, but it could be a GA. Thoughts please!!! Bluegoblin7 10:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
• Plymouth, England is currently rated as a start-class. I believe it has improved a lot since then and the assessment had no comments. Bsrboy (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
• Ivybridge has had some major work done to it. Bsrboy (talk) 15:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
• Cumbria Way - I've recently done a big expansion to this article. Nk.sheridan   Talk 17:54, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
• The King's School, Ely - in for peer review with WPSchools, but would like to know how it sits in WPEngland rocketman89 (talk) 11:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• Bridgnorth Endowed School I have now added content on curriculum, OFSTED inspections, extra curricular activities, and uniform, with references, I have also now added the school logo, and I have also now added references for the alumni.OldBridgnorthian (talk) 01:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
• Cunard Line has been extensively rewritten. (GRUBBXDN (talk) 11:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC))
• George Furness Extra refernces included. Ursulanium (talk) 14:10, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
• English National Ice Hockey League; is this still 'stub' class after my recent updates? Any suggestions for improvments? Thanks, AltitudeJunkie (talk) 16:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
• Crudgington has had referenced content added - can it be lifted out of stub class now? Thanks Slowbrownfox (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
• Battle of Bosworth Field: as a battle that set up the Tudor dynasty, this is unlikely to be just "Start" class (considering the expansion it has undergone). An assessment of its importance would also be nice. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 07:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
• Battle of Barnet: it is now a Featured Article, but its importance to this project is unknown. Could you offer your judgment? Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC)