MyWiki:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Wikipedia articles by quality statistics}}
Welcome to the assessment department of the Wikipedia WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia-related articles (for scope, see the WikiProject page). 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 Wikipedia}} banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Wikipedia articles by quality and Category:Wikipedia articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Subpages
[edit source]Popular pages: A bot-generated list of pageviews, useful for focused cleanup of frequently viewed articles.
Frequently asked questions
[edit source]- See also the general assessment 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 Wikipedia}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
- 3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} 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 project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
- 4. Who can assess articles?
- Any member of WikiProject Wikipedia 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; this is documented in the detailed assessment scale below.
- 6. 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.
- 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the detailed assessment scale below.
- 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 you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.
Instructions
[edit source]Quality assessments
[edit source]An article's quality assessment is recorded using the |class= parameter in the {{WikiProject banner shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} 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 Wikipedia articles category) |  FA |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| FL | (for featured lists only; adds them to the FL-Class Wikipedia articles category) | FL |
|
| A | (for articles that passed a formal peer review only; adds them to the A-Class Wikipedia articles category) |  A |
|
| GA | (for good articles only; adds them to the GA-Class Wikipedia articles category) |  GA |
|
| B | (for articles that satisfy all of the B-Class criteria; adds them to the B-Class Wikipedia articles category) | B | |
| C | (for substantial articles; adds them to the C-Class Wikipedia articles category) | C | |
| Start | (for developing articles; adds them to the Start-Class Wikipedia articles category) | Start | |
| Stub | (for basic articles; adds them to the Stub-Class Wikipedia articles category) | Stub | |
| List | (for stand-alone lists; adds them to the List-Class Wikipedia articles category) | List | |
| NA | (for any other pages where assessment is unwarranted; adds them to the NA-Class Wikipedia pages category) | NA | |
| ??? | (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in the Unassessed Wikipedia articles category) | ??? |
For non-mainspace content, the following values may be used:
| Category | (for categories; adds them to the Category-Class Wikipedia pages category) | Category | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Draft | (for drafts; adds them to the Draft-Class Wikipedia pages category) | Draft | |
| File | (for files and timed text; adds them to the File-Class Wikipedia pages category) | File | |
| Portal | (for portal pages; adds them to the Portal-Class Wikipedia pages category) | Portal | |
| Project | (for project pages; adds them to the Project-Class Wikipedia pages category) | Project | |
| Template | (for templates and modules; adds them to the Template-Class Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia pages category) | Disambig | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Redirect | (for redirect pages; adds them to the Redirect-Class Wikipedia pages category) | Redirect |
| 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. | Cleopatra (as of June 2018) |
| 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 dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
| 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. | 30 years war |
| 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. | Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia |
| 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. | Wikimedia Foundation |
| 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. | Wikitravel |
| 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:
|
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. | Bellevue School District |
| 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. | Geographical bias on Wikipedia |
| 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 Wikipedias |
| 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:Wikimedia |
| 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. | Wikipedia (disambiguation) |
| 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:Wiki.png |
| 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. | N/A |
| 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 Wikipedia |
| 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:List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia |
| 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:Wikipedia |
| 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 assessment
[edit source]An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Wikipedia|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 Wikipedia articles) | Top | |
| High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Wikipedia articles) | High | |
| Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Wikipedia articles) | Mid | |
| Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Wikipedia articles) | Low | |
| NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Wikipedia articles) | NA | |
| ??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Wikipedia articles) | ??? |
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 Wikipedia.
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.
| 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. | Wikipedia |
| High | Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Wikimania |
| Mid | Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | Nupedia |
| 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. | Malayalam Wikipedia |
| NA | Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. | Category:Wikipedia |
| ??? | Subject importance has not yet been assessed. | Magnus Manske |
Assessment requests
[edit source] | For an introduction to assessments, see Assessment information. |
If you have made significant changes to an article related to Wikipedia and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it:
- On the article's Talk page, blank the class parameter like WikiProject banner shell|class=.
The article is then immediately included at Category:Unassessed articles and associated WikiProject sub-categories.
- OR
- List the request below, and SIGN with four ~~~~ and then wait for the article's assessment. Note that due to the limited number of volunteers here at this WikiProject, there may be a significant delay in answering the request.
- Assessment requests are reviewed by volunteers, and more are always welcome to help. To make their work manageable, each request must contain only one article. Users may submit as many articles as they like, but each should be entered as a separate request.
Requests from 2025
[edit source]Until December 2025, this page hosted assessment requests for any article, not necessarily related to Wikipedia. These requests should now be made at Wikipedia:Content assessment/Requests.
Requests from November 2025
[edit source]- Requesting assessment for Slider (mobile phones) and Clamshell design ~2025-37328-88 (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment of Dionne Foster. Thanks Bpuddin (talk) 03:49, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting an assessment of Eddie Lin. Thanks Bpuddin (talk) 22:19, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
Done Assessing as C. Definitely not start, going to refrain from giving B for now, maybe once it's a little longer. Also, you need a reference for the sentence in the 'Tenure' section. Thanks for your work! JustARandomSquid (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting an assessment of 2025 Bloomington, Minnesota municipal election. Thank you, NotDragonius (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done assessed as List class. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:26, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- May I ask why? I don't know of any election articles like this that are assessed as a list. Thanks, NotDragonius (talk) 02:56, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- I see it as a list of elections in Bloomington, Minnesota on Nov. 4, 2025. If another reviewer disagrees, I welcome a discussion. Ktkvtsh (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- I feel that there is significant prose that makes it more than a list, similar to a plethora of related articles. (e.g. 2025 Minneapolis City Council election, 2023 Bloomington, Minnesota municipal election, 2017 Minneapolis City Council election) NotDragonius (talk) 04:27, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- I see it as a list of elections in Bloomington, Minnesota on Nov. 4, 2025. If another reviewer disagrees, I welcome a discussion. Ktkvtsh (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- May I ask why? I don't know of any election articles like this that are assessed as a list. Thanks, NotDragonius (talk) 02:56, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment of Tengku Mahmood Mahyideen, as it has been significantly expanded. Thanks in advance.Letsgowiththis (talk) 04:28, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Reassessing as B. Great work! I do believe you have one paragraph without a reference at the end, maybe you could fix that? But otherwise this is great. If you were hoping for a higher score, we can't do that here, you'll have to go to somewhere like WP:GAN. JustARandomSquid (talk) 07:49, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment of Service Design. The page has been edited and new information has been added. We hope it has been improved enough to move up from a Start-Class. A second opinion would be appreciated. Jomarch19 (talk) 04:31, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Turbana (company). Originally asked at WikiProject Serbia a very very long time ago, and I'm actually not sure what to give it so I'm going to put it here. JustARandomSquid (talk) 09:29, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment of Nubian ibex. The subject matter is comprehensively covered and I think it is at least GA or A-class. If not, can someone recommend what I can do to get the article to that point? Thank you, Bbreslau (talk) 15:38, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Not done The article is rated B-class, which is the highest rating an article can get without a formal review process. I've taken an extremely brief look at it, and I don't see any immediate issues, so if you believe it fulfills the good article criteria, the right place to nominate it is at WP:GAN. JustARandomSquid (talk) 22:41, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment of Mexican wolf. It's been listed as C-class for awhile, but I think that I and other contributors have added enough comprehensive details to make it B-class or higher. Thank you for your help, Bbreslau (talk) 15:31, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done I've removed a AI-generated sentence from the Taxonomy section, but otherwise the article meets the B-class criteria. Good work! JustARandomSquid (talk) 22:51, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of The Executioner and Her Way of Life. I believe it's been expanded enough to move beyond Start-class to C- or even B-class, but a second opinion would be much appreciated. Crestfalling (talk) 07:26, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Dislocated shoulder. Shadydrew (talk) 20:38, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Start to C — several unreferenced sentences, so not really B-class, but definitely much more comprehensive than Start. Good work! JustARandomSquid (talk) 20:33, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Labor Inducer (hamburger). Purely length-wise, Start is ok, but there isn't much information on the topic, so I'd argue it's much more comprehensive than it looks. JustARandomSquid (talk) 21:18, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done - sure, changed from start to C. GoldRomean (talk) 15:17, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
- Request assessment of WALANT JH (talk) 19:46, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessments of Newcastle Museum, 2025 ARIA Music Awards and AUSMIN.Qwerty123M (talk) 12:38, 19 November 2025 (UTC). Updated at 13:17, 19 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Qwerty123M, each assessment request should be posted as a separate request please. This helps keep it easier for volunteers to make sure they get every requested article assessed. Ktkvtsh (talk) 00:38, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Newcastle Museum assesed as C class. 2015 ARIA Music Awards and AUSMIN as Start class. Ktkvtsh (talk) 00:39, 20 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Arjun Subramaniam.Jībanmṛtamessage 12:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done, as start. GoldRomean (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Statewide Treaty Act 2025. I think the article is better than start-class (maybe C) but I'm not confident enough to unilaterally add the different classification and I think I would be biased. Can you please tell me why the article is or is not worthy of a classification higher than start-class? Qwerty123M (talk) 23:00, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done I've updated it to C-class. There's a statement that doesn't seem to have a reference in the Provisions section? If you fix that, you're free to update it to B-class yourself if you know how to. It would also be great if the reactions section could be expanded. JustARandomSquid (talk) 23:16, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Most Valuable Promotions Kieraaaa (talk) 23:52, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
- Not done as I agree with the current rating of C class. Expanding can be done on the creation and ownership of the article subject. Article is 50% body and 50% tables. Ktkvtsh (talk) 06:17, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- I don't think it's so much the tables that are the issue, it's that there's literally no information on when it was founded at all. I see the date 2021, but the reference doesn't say that. It was actually founded by Jake Paul, so there's almost certainly information on it. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:13, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- I think it's fair to say that more info is needed on the establishment understand that, but the source does specifically say it was founded in 2021, the article was written in 2021 and the article in the section paragraph says "the YouTube-star-turned-prizefighter, and his adviser, Nakisa Bidarian, founded Most Valuable Promotions earlier this year." Kieraaaa (talk) 15:07, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- I don't think it's so much the tables that are the issue, it's that there's literally no information on when it was founded at all. I see the date 2021, but the reference doesn't say that. It was actually founded by Jake Paul, so there's almost certainly information on it. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:13, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Sindoor. Jībanmṛta (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done, start to C. GoldRomean (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Agreement in the English language. Jumijomi (talk) 00:47, 15 November 2025 (UTC)
- Not done One of the requirements for B-class is that the article 'does not contain obvious omissions', and this article has a lot of 'this section needs expansion' templates, so I'm keeping this at C-class. Additionally, I've added a 'written like a textbook' template at the top, which technically isn't disqualifying from B-class status, however is a problem. See WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. Good work, though, and happy editing! JustARandomSquid (talk) 07:57, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- I think it should be labeled "Done" then. Neither did I ask for reassessment nor for changing its class from C to B. When I made a request here, the article didn't have any class at all Jumijomi (talk) 08:23, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't realise that.
Already done might've been more appropriate then. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:40, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't realise that.
- I think it should be labeled "Done" then. Neither did I ask for reassessment nor for changing its class from C to B. When I made a request here, the article didn't have any class at all Jumijomi (talk) 08:23, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of American Public Human Services Association remove stub class? Hawksquill (talk)
- Requesting assessment of Loula Friend Dunn new article Hawksquill (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
- Already done, has already been assessed as B. I've added a citation needed tag. JustARandomSquid (talk) 20:36, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Elizabeth Bartlett (British poet) can stub class be removed? Hawksquill (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done, stub to start. GoldRomean (talk) 16:34, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of PappaRich. Isi96 (talk) 23:58, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Kurama Fire Festival. Jībanmṛta (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of The Floor Plan. Jībanmṛta (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Center for Axion and Precision Physics. Jībanmṛta (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Already done by Praemonitus. Assessed as Start class. Ktkvtsh (talk) 06:05, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Kumbhandas. Jībanmṛta (talk) 16:33, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done, as start. GoldRomean (talk) 18:16, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of 1998 Georgian attempted mutiny. Rutdam (talk) 10:55, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Already done by JustARandomSquid. Assessed as C class. Ktkvtsh (talk) 06:07, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Siege of Ani Rutdam (talk) 10:53, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Alliance for Georgia Rutdam (talk) 10:38, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Georgian March. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Start to B. JustARandomSquid (talk) 23:36, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Lelo for Georgia. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Stub to B, the biggest possible jump. Good work. JustARandomSquid (talk) 23:08, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of New Political Centre – Girchi. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Start to C. Several unsourced statements (and an entire paragraph) preventing it from being B, but definitely a thorough treatment of the topic. JustARandomSquid (talk) 23:02, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Strength is in Unity (political coalition). Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of 2020 Georgian parliamentary election. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of 2012 Georgian parliamentary election. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of 2024 Georgian parliamentary election. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done - upped from C to B, but I feel like the article could be trimmed slightly (currently sitting at ~12574 words of prose size). GoldRomean (talk) 18:18, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of AKP–Gülen movement conflict. Rutdam (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of 2021 Georgian local elections. Rutdam (talk) 03:58, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Christopher Zeeman Medal for Communication of Mathematics. Sushidude21! (talk) 07:42, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done, as start. GoldRomean (talk) 17:52, 19 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Bitmoji Kllom (talk) 03:36, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Bixby (software) Kllom (talk) 02:37, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Samsung Notes Kllom (talk) 01:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Galaxy Avatar Kllom (talk) 23:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC) ♦♦♦
- Requesting assessment of Highland ClearancesThoughtIdRetired TIR 20:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Assessment log
[edit source]| Wikipedia articles: Index · Statistics · Log |
- 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/Wikipedia articles by quality log}}