MyWiki:WikiProject Arizona/Assessment

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Arizona/Tab header}}

{{Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Arizona_articles_by_quality_statistics|align:right}}

Welcome to the assessment department of the Arizona WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Arizona related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the WP:1.0 program,

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Arizona}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Arizona articles by quality.

FAQ

1. What is the purpose of the article ratings?

The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.

2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject?

Just add {{WikiProject Arizona}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Arizona}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. What should I do?

Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).

4. Who can assess articles?

Any member of the Arizona WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes.

5. How do I rate an article?

Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.

6. Can I request that someone else rate an article?

Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.

7. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.

8. Aren't the ratings subjective?

Yes, they are somewhat subjective, but it's the best system we've been able to devise. If you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!

9. What if I have a question not listed here?

If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, leave a message on the talk page.

Assessment instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Arizona}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{WikiProject Arizona |class=???|importance=???}}

Article quality

An article's quality assessment is recorded using the |class= parameter in the {{WikiProject banner shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Arizona}} banner template on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.

The following standard grades may be used to describe the quality of mainspace articles (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):

FA	(for featured articles only; adds them to the FA-Class Arizona articles category)		FA
FL	(for featured lists only; adds them to the FL-Class Arizona articles category)		FL
A	(for articles that passed a formal peer review only; adds them to the A-Class Arizona articles category)		Error creating thumbnail:  A
GA	(for good articles only; adds them to the GA-Class Arizona articles category)		Error creating thumbnail:  GA
B	(for articles that satisfy all of the B-Class criteria; adds them to the B-Class Arizona articles category)		B
C	(for substantial articles; adds them to the C-Class Arizona articles category)		C
Start	(for developing articles; adds them to the Start-Class Arizona articles category)		Start
Stub	(for basic articles; adds them to the Stub-Class Arizona articles category)		Stub
List	(for stand-alone lists; adds them to the List-Class Arizona articles category)		List
NA	(for any other pages where assessment is unwarranted; adds them to the NA-Class Arizona pages category)		NA
???	(articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in the Unassessed Arizona articles category)		???

For non-mainspace content, the following values may be used:

FM	(for featured media only; adds them to the FM-Class Arizona pages category)		FM
Category	(for categories; adds them to the Category-Class Arizona pages category)		Category
Draft	(for drafts; adds them to the Draft-Class Arizona pages category)		Draft
File	(for files and timed text; adds them to the File-Class Arizona pages category)		File
Portal	(for portal pages; adds them to the Portal-Class Arizona pages category)		Portal
Project	(for project pages; adds them to the Project-Class Arizona pages category)		Project
Template	(for templates and modules; adds them to the Template-Class Arizona pages category)		Template

The following non-standard assessment grades for mainspace content may be used at a WikiProject's discretion:

Disambig	(for disambiguation pages; adds them to the Disambig-Class Arizona pages category)		Disambig
Redirect	(for redirect pages; adds them to the Redirect-Class Arizona pages category)		Redirect

Article importance

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

{{WikiProject Arizona|importance=???}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):

Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Arizona articles)		Top
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Arizona articles)		High
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Arizona articles)		Mid
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Arizona articles)		Low
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Arizona articles)		NA
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Arizona articles)		???

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Arizona articles.

Legend

Quality scale

WikiProject content quality grading scheme

Class	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA	The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured article criteria:{{Wikipedia:Featured article criteria}}	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.	Petrified Forest National Park
FL	The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured list criteria:{{Wikipedia:Featured list criteria}}	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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.	List of Governors of Arizona
FM	Pictures that have attained featured picture status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. More detailed criteria {{Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria}}	The page contains a featured image, sound clip or other media-related content.	Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited.	File:Monument Valley 2.jpg
Error creating thumbnail:  A	The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined 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: {{Wikipedia:Content assessment/A-Class criteria|raw=yes}}	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting.	Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help.	N/A
Error creating thumbnail:  GA	The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria}}	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication.	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.	Phoenix Zoo
B	The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria {{Wikipedia:Content assessment/B-Class criteria|raw=yes}}	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. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines.	Lake Powell
C	The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.	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 solve cleanup problems.	Sentinel Peak (Arizona)
Start	An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following: A useful picture or graphic Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article	Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more.	Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon.	El Tovar Hotel
Stub	A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria.	Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant.	Fire Point Trail
List	Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, 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 valleys of Arizona
Category	Any category falls under this class.	Categories are mainly used to group together articles within a particular subject area.	Large categories may need to be split into one or more subcategories. Be wary of articles that have been miscategorized.	Category:Arizona
Disambig	Any disambiguation page falls under this class.	The page serves to distinguish multiple articles that share the same (or similar) title.	Additions should be made as new articles of that name are created. Pay close attention to the proper naming of such pages, as they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title.	Kearny Airport
File	Any page in the file namespace falls under this class.	The page contains an image, a sound clip or other media-related content.	Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited.	File:Flag of Arizona.svg
Portal	Any page in the portal namespace falls under this class.	Portals are intended to serve as "main pages" for specific topics.	Editor involvement is essential to ensure that portals are kept up to date.	Portal:Arizona
Project	All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class.	Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development.	Develop these pages into collaborative resources that are useful for improving articles within the project.	Wikipedia:WikiProject Arizona
Redirect	Any redirect falls under this class.	The page redirects to another article with a similar name, related topic or that has been merged with the original article at this location.	Editor involvement is essential to ensure that articles are not mis-classified as redirects, and that redirects are not mis-classified as articles.	Marshall Ranch Elementary
Template	Any template falls under this class. The most common types of templates include infoboxes and navboxes.	Different types of templates serve different purposes. Infoboxes provide easy access to key pieces of information about the subject. Navboxes are for the purpose of grouping together related subjects into an easily accessible format, to assist the user in navigating between articles.	Infoboxes are typically placed at the upper right of an article, while navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page. Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information.	Template:Arizona
NA	Any non-article page that fits no other classification.	The page contains no article content.	Look out for misclassified articles. Currently, many NA-class articles may need to be re-classified.	N/A

Importance scale

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Arizona.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.

WikiProject article importance scheme

Importance	Criteria	Example
Top	Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field.	Arizona
High	Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent.	Tohono O'odham
Mid	Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area.	Kofa Mountains
Low	Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article.	Globe Ranger Station
NA	Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc.	Category:Arizona
???	Subject importance has not yet been assessed.	???

Requests for 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.

Chiricahua Mountains - BAlvarius (talk) 00:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Done, the article is now rated start class. JJ98 (Talk) 10:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Musical Instrument Museum (Phoenix) User: Shakinglord

Assess as stub class. JJ98 (Talk) 00:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Sierra Madre Occidental --Al Climbs (talk) 21:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Heard Building - Cantstandya (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Meridian Bank Tower (Phoenix) - Cantstandya (talk) 06:29, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Harriet C. Babbitt - --TommyBoy (talk) 21:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Assessment Log

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.

{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Arizona articles by quality log}}