MyWiki:WikiProject Objectivism/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is the assessment department of WikiProject Objectivism. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles of Objectivism. 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

[edit source]
How can I get my article rated?
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of WikiProject Objectivism is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
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.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are, 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 them on the discussion page for this department.

Instructions

[edit source]

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameters in the {{WikiProject Objectivism}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Objectivism|class=|importance=}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

Quality scale

[edit source]
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. currently no articles for this project are FA-class
 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. currently no articles for this project are FL-class
 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. currently there is no A-class review for this project
 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. Ayn Rand
(as of April 2011)
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. Journals of Ayn Rand
(as of April 2011)
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. Nathaniel Branden
(as of March 2011)
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. Harry Binswanger
(as of March 2011)
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. The Voice of Reason
(as of September 2010)
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 Atlas Shrugged Characters
(as of April 2011)
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. Wikipedia:5P
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.

Requesting an assessment

[edit source]

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.

  1. Anthem_(novella) It's currently listed as C, but I think due to the recent (major) changes it may rank as higher. Brandonk2009 (talk) 16:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Assessment log

[edit source]
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/Objectivism articles by quality log}}

Worklist

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

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

Retrieved from "http://70.231.62.181/index.php?title=MyWiki:WikiProject_Objectivism/Assessment&oldid=5435283"