MyWiki:WikiProject Medicine/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcuts
Quality: FA | A | GA | B | C | Start | Stub | Unassessed · Importance: Top | High | Mid | Low | Unknown

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Medicine! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's medicine articles . While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work. Anyone can assess articles. You do not need to be an administrator, or even be a registered editor. Please follow the instructions below to help out with this ongoing task. The Wikipedia-wide importance scheme and quality scheme are used.

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Navigation}} The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPMED}} banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Medicine articles by quality and Category:Medicine articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

All articles under medicine project should try to adhere to Manual of Style (medicine-related articles). An article is unlikely to attract a grade above B class if it does not conform to style guideline. A Featured Article is the highest possible assessment, and requires a community consensus demonstrated at Featured Article Candidates per the guidelines of What Is a Featured Article?

Frequently asked questions

[edit source]
How can I get an article rated?
First, make sure that the article is actually within the scope of the project (see below). If it is, you can list it in the requesting an assessment section below.
Who can assess articles?
Anyone is free to add—or change—the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
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.
Where can I get more comments about an article?
Contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine who will handle it or assign the issue to someone. You may also list it for a Peer review.
What if I don't agree with a rating?
Relist it as a request or contact the project.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask on the discussion page for this department, or to contact the Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine directly.

Is WPMED the correct WikiProject to support this article?

[edit source]
Shortcut

This project supports articles related to medicine, such as diseases, conditions, and treatments for humans. However, there are many areas of medicine that it does not support, including veterinary medicine and alternative medicine. Additionally, there are other projects that are more closely related to some articles. Here are some other projects that may be better matches for some topics:

Probably no
Use judgment
Yes

Instructions

[edit source]

An article's assessment is generated from the parameters in the {{WPMED}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed medicine articles (empty as of June 2011).

Syntax

[edit source]

You can learn the syntax by looking at the talk pages in edit mode and by reading the info below. This is the rating syntax (ratings are samples, change to what applies to the article in question):

{{WPMED |class= |importance=}}
  • Displays the default banner, showing the project info and only ??? for the quality and importance parameters.
{{WPMED|class=A|importance=Top}}
  • Classed A with Top priority. All assessed articles should have quality and importance filled in.

Quality assessment

[edit source]

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

{{WPMED |class=???}}

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

Priority assessment

[edit source]

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

{{WPMED |importance=???}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

Task force parameters

[edit source]

If an article is within the scope of a task force, use the code below, replacing taskforce with the name of the desired task force:

{{WPMED|taskforce=Yes |taskforce-imp=???}}

The following parameters may be used for the taskforce variable, with the value always being Yes:

For task forces that use their own priority assessment, the taskforce-imp parameter should be used, replacing "taskforce" in taskforce-imp with one of the above values. Acceptable values for the taskforce-imp parameters are the same as for the importance parameter, listed above in #Priority assessment.

If a taskforce is indicated, but a taskforce-imp is not given, some taskforces will use the WPMED importance, whereas others will rank it as unassessed importance for the taskforce.

Quality scale

[edit source]
WikiProject content quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
File:Featured article star.svg 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. Dementia with Lewy bodies
File:Featured article star.svg 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 cutaneous conditions
File:Featured article star.svg 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:PET-MIPS-anim.gif
File:Symbol a class.svg 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. Not currently used by this project
File:Symbol support vote.svg 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. Common cold
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. Tuberous sclerosis
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. Islets of Langerhans
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. AIDS-related lymphoma
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. Acrospiroma
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 medical schools in the United States
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:Medicine
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. Doctor
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:Scar.JPG
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:Medicine
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 Medicine
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. Heart attack
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:Infobox disease
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. Not currently used by this project


Importance scale

[edit source]
Shortcut

The purpose of the importance rating is to direct the project's article improvement efforts towards the most important articles, and incidentally to provide a convenient shortlist of important topics for readers who are interested in medicine generally.

All diseases, conditions, medications, and tests are of "top" importance to people who are directly affected by them. 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 that the average reader of Wikipedia will 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 that are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to a student, expert or patient.

WPMED's specific guidelines for importance ratings are provided below. In making an assessment, it is often helpful to compare the article with others that already have the proposed rating. Links to each category are provided in the first column of this table:

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top priority Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to medicine. Strong interest from non-professionals around the world. Usually a large subject with many associated sub-articles. Less than 1% of medicine-related articles achieve this rating. Tuberculosis or Cancer
High priority Subject is clearly important. Subject is interesting to, or directly affects, many average readers. This category includes the most common diseases and treatments as well as major areas of specialization. Fewer than 10% of medicine-related articles achieve this rating. Coeliac disease or Mastectomy
Mid priority Normal priority for article improvement. A good article would be interesting or useful to many readers. Subject is notable within its particular specialty. This category includes most medical conditions, tests, approved drugs, medical subspecialties, well-known anatomy, and common signs and symptoms. Cholangiocarcinoma or Cramp
Low priority Article may only be included to cover a specific part of a more important article, or may be only loosely connected to medicine. Subject may be specific to one country or part of one country, such as licensing requirements or organizations. This category includes most of the following: very rare diseases, lesser-known medical signs, equipment, hospitals, individuals, historical information, publications, laws, investigational drugs, detailed genetic and physiological information, and obscure anatomical features. Leopard syndrome or Flynn effect
NA NA means Not an Article. This label is used for all pages that are not articles, such as templates, categories, and disambiguation pages. (To mark an article as "needs assessment" or "not assessed," simply leave the importance parameter empty, like this: |importance= ) WikiProject Medicine

Statistics

[edit source]
WikiProject Medicine assessment statistics

{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Medicine articles by quality statistics}} worklist • log • category

Requesting an assessment or re-assessment

[edit source]
What you can accomplish here
This process is to find out whether your article is currently assessed at the correct level (Stub, Start, C, B) and correct importance (Low, Mid, High, Top). If you have significantly expanded an article and it is rated below B class, or if you feel the rating is otherwise incorrect, then please feel free to list it below.
What you can NOT accomplish here
  • If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, contact the volunteers at WT:MED or list it at Peer review instead.
  • If you think the article is particularly well written, then you can nominate it as a possible Good article or even as a possible Featured article.
  • We do not currently have a process for identifying A-class articles.
Add articles here! Newest requests on the BOTTOM

List

[edit source]
  • Uterine prolapse - Currently an S-class article of mid-importance. I updated it significantly over the last month. I added several new sections to follow the manual of style: signs and symptoms, diagnosis and management, outcomes, epidemiology, and history. I also expanded on existing sections, edited the lead, updated references where they could be updated with secondary sources from within the last 5ish years, and added several images. --PPatel224 (talk) 14:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
    File:Yes check.svg Done B class. Thank you for your work on this article, @PPatel224. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:04, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Renal hypoplasia - Currently rated Stub-class, but it has been expanded a bit. Thanks, AxiumWiki (talk) 07:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
    File:Yes check.svg Done C class. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Laryngitis - Rated Start-class since 2008. It needs a reassessment. Thanks, AxiumWiki (talk) 01:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
    File:Yes check.svg Done C class.
    @AxiumWiki, if you are interested in expanding this article, please see WP:MEDSECTIONS for some suggested subtopics. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
  • Irritation fibroma - Currently unassessed. Thanks, AxiumWiki (talk) 05:42, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
    @AxiumWiki, I have quickly assessed all three for you. You are allowed to assess articles on your own, too. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
    Thanks. I’m not confident enough to rate articles on my own and I prefer someone else to do it. AxiumWiki (talk) 06:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
    No problem. Thanks for improving these articles. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Necrotizing fasciitis - Currently rated C-class, I expanded existing sections, reorganized paragraphs for better readability, added citations, uploaded new media, and deleted redundant areas. I'm a new editor, so I would really appreciate it if someone could look this over and let me know what they think. Thanks in advance! Operapear Operapear (talk) 19:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
    File:Yes check.svg Done B-class. Thank you for your work. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:36, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
  • There's a few articles I'm not sure about whether they should be in high or top importance:
    I would not list the obsolete diagnosis of Asperger as a top-importance article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:17, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
  • One article I feel strongly about should not be in our priority list is medical doctor. The bold reassessment was reverted by User:CFCF. For context, I'm reassessing these to start a big push to get our top important (and most-read) articles all up to B-class (see discussion). Medical doctor has less than 500 views a day, whereas many of the newly categorised articles have 2000-3000 pageviews and, as many of them are medical conditions, are more damaging if we get it wrong. Let's discuss here. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
    I disagree that popularity is the indicator of importance. CFCF (talk) 21:49, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
    Readership is the only explicit criterion listed in WP:MEDIMP. To me, the top-importance articles are those where we really should get it right, for instance because errors might lead to real-world harms. During the discussion at WT:MED, we discussed other considerations (misinformation on the topic, disease burden). I don't see medical doctor as meeting any of those considerations. How do you see that category? What do you consider top-importance if we're going to do a big push next year to get all of the top-importance articles to B-class or above? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:27, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
    I think the question is, if you remove Physician, then what, if anything, would you add in its place? I could imagine deciding that Chronic pain or Diverticulitis is more important.
    (I was surprised to see just now that Physician got moved to Medical doctor earlier this year per Talk:Medical doctor#Requested move 5 April 2025.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:16, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
    I swapped physician boldly, so with the revert we're at 101 articles again in the top-importance articles. Not sure what the swap was here, but possibly something like coronary artery disease (top3 mortality) or borderline personality disorder (very high pageviews). Medical doctor has fewer than 100 daily pageviews now, and is the lowest-read in our top-importance articles: [1].
    I found a good swap for major trauma: blunt trauma gets 10x the views and is the trauma type typically involved in traffic collissions, which is the 8th leading cause of death. Will swap those if there is no objection. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:07, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
    This one is now swapped. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:52, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
  • Breast cancer is a really important article in the area of women's health that should be reviewed and brought up to GA status. MMO Tracking (talk) 19:05, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
    Hi @MMO Tracking. If you'd like to work on it with others, why not propose it for the Medical Collaboration of the Month? I hope we can select 12 top-importance articles to get to B or GA class collaboratively, as part of the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Vital Signs 2026 campaign. User:Ajpolino might be interested as well, as he's been working on getting the big cancer articles up to FA. It is already top-importance. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:26, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
    I listed Metastatic breast cancer there a while back. A truly dire article. MMO Tracking (talk) 19:36, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
    This process is to find out whether your article is currently assessed at the correct level (Stub, Start, C, B) and correct importance (Low, Mid, High, Top). It's not a good way to draw attention to an article that needs improvement. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:02, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://70.231.62.181/index.php?title=MyWiki:WikiProject_Medicine/Assessment&oldid=13117560"