Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment
Wikipedia articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Total | ||
FL | 1 | 1 | |||||
GA | 3 | 11 | 14 | ||||
B | 7 | 5 | 12 | 15 | 39 | ||
C | 6 | 33 | 40 | 59 | 138 | ||
Start | 14 | 65 | 126 | 205 | |||
Stub | 1 | 10 | 42 | 53 | |||
List | 2 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 15 | ||
Category | 111 | 111 | |||||
Disambig | 3 | 3 | |||||
File | 44 | 44 | |||||
Project | 2 | 4 | 3 | 156 | 165 | ||
Redirect | 1 | 7 | 37 | 89 | 134 | ||
Template | 2 | 57 | 59 | ||||
Other | 1 | 9 | 10 | ||||
Assessed | 15 | 57 | 149 | 301 | 469 | 991 | |
Total | 15 | 57 | 149 | 301 | 469 | 991 | |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 2,040 | Ω = 4.54 |
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.
Frequently asked questions[edit]
- 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 assessment scale.
- 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 assessment scale.
- 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]
Quality assessments[edit]
An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} project banner on its talk page: {{WikiProject Wikipedia|class=???}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):
FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Wikipedia articles) | FA | |
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Wikipedia articles) | A | |
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Wikipedia articles) | GA | |
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Wikipedia articles) | B | |
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Wikipedia articles) | C | |
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Wikipedia articles) | Start | |
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Wikipedia articles) | Stub | |
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Wikipedia articles) | FL | |
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Wikipedia articles) | List |
For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:
Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Wikipedia articles) | Category | |
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Wikipedia articles) | Disambig | |
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Wikipedia articles) | Draft | |
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Wikipedia articles) | File | |
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Wikipedia articles) | Portal | |
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Wikipedia articles) | Project | |
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Wikipedia articles) | Redirect | |
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Wikipedia articles) | Template | |
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Wikipedia articles) | NA | |
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Wikipedia articles) | ??? |
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:
A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.
|
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:
|
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. | 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:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. 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). |
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
A good article is:
|
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
|
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. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. | 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]
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} project banner on its talk page:
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. | Polish Wikipedia |
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 |
Requesting an assessment[edit]
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.
- Requesting assessment of Heather Tom. Feebs592 (talk) 09:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Over the Hill with the Swords of a Thousand Men (The Boys episode). TarheelBornBred (talk) 05:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Europa: The Last Battle. Isi96 (talk) 02:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Evangelicalism in the United States. Naviguessor (talk) 02:15, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Eberhard-Ludwigs-Gymnasium. FortunateSons (talk) 07:57, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- ➡ Requests from May 2024: ⬇
🔵 78 of 89 requests done: 96.8% complete | ||
- Requesting reassessment of Lev Gatovsky. [[User:ZenZeppelin]] (talk) 23:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- The current assessment was made for the original article when it was a stub. Since then I've made the article from scratch twice. The first version got nominated for the DYK, and after it got rejected, I remade it again following the advice received. Thanks for your work. ZenZeppelin (talk) 10:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Foodspring. FortunateSons (talk) 09:12, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Eight Cousins. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Under the Lilacs. Heidi Pusey BYU (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Sitar Hu741f4 (talk) 18:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Revival Process. Pietrus1 (talk) 17:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I would like to know where this article stands and if summary style between it and Big Excursion have been properly introduced per the duplication tag. It is not a very active area, so probably best to get an opinion here. Pietrus1 (talk) 17:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Sonya Clark Sonoet2 (talk) 14:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Space Monster Wangmagwi HumbleSolipsist1 (talk) 06:53, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Julie Blakstad Joeykai (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Thaísa Moreno Joeykai (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Martina Müller (footballer) Joeykai (talk) 23:58, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Camila (footballer) Joeykai (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Kailen Sheridan Joeykai (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Kylie Strom Joeykai (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Klara Bühl Joeykai (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Hinata Miyazawa Joeykai (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Mina Tanaka Joeykai (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Evelyne Viens Joeykai (talk) 17:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Riko Ueki Joeykai (talk) 20:48, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Lena Oberdorf Joeykai (talk) 20:48, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Marissa Sheva Joeykai (talk) 20:48, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Aubrey Kingsbury Joeykai (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Leah Pruitt Joeykai (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Sophia Braun Joeykai (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Inland Steel Company I have done significant work and would be grateful for feedback.BoatnerdJenn (talk) 19:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @BoatnerdJenn, upgraded assessment from Start to B. It looks fantastic. Consider making a good article nomination. Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Nichelle Prince Joeykai (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Viviane Asseyi Joeykai (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Mizuho Sakaguchi Joeykai (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Kerolin Joeykai (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Malin Andersson Joeykai (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Heidi Mohr Joeykai (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Risa Shimizu (footballer) Joeykai (talk) 18:19, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Yūki Nagasato Joeykai (talk) 16:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Linda Medalen Joeykai (talk) 15:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Lineth Beerensteyn Joeykai (talk) 15:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Sjoeke Nüsken Joeykai (talk) 15:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Big Excursion. I have made significant changes and would like feedback if possible. Pietrus1 (talk) 00:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Raigō of Amida and Twenty-five Attendants NeverBeGameOver (talk) 22:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @NeverBeGameOver, assessed as B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Opole. I never edited the article though, it's just that for me the Start class seems to be a bit too low, and I don't feel confident enough to change it on my own. Dżamper (talk) 20:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Fusajiro Yamauchi DanganMachin (talk) 09:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @DanganMachin, upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Stockwell (surname) with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of 6th Cavalry Museum with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Barrow County Museum with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Crawford W. Long Museum with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Harbins Park with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Monroe Museum with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Nodoroc with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Rainier Russet with thanks, MallardTV (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @Joseywales1961, who assessed as Stub @MallardTV. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Antonia Göransson Joeykai (talk) 01:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Valentina Giacinti Joeykai (talk) 01:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Mariona Caldentey Joeykai (talk) 01:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Battle of Chumb (1965) Fauji Enthusiast (talk) 18:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @Saqib, who assessed as C @Fauji Enthusiast. This article does need attention as there are several notices. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:16, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- May I kindly request for an assessment for the Gupta conquests of Bengal, if possible to B rating? Jonharojjashi (talk) 13:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Jonharojjashi, upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of HP Spectre (currently Start but I think it deserves an upgrade) --Privateeih (talk) 00:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Privateeih, upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. Can I also ask if this has any affect on search engine indexing? Because I've noticed that compared to other similar articles, googling 'hp spectre' doesn't bring this article up anywhere near the top and it's way down below which is strange for a Wikipedia article. Privateeih (talk) 19:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have any statistical reason for this, but Wikipedia entries for terms related to tech companies, such as phones, tablets, computers are usually indexed lower than the companies themselves and advertisements because they tend to be much more aggressive with ad placement and search engine optimization. Reconrabbit 23:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. Can I also ask if this has any affect on search engine indexing? Because I've noticed that compared to other similar articles, googling 'hp spectre' doesn't bring this article up anywhere near the top and it's way down below which is strange for a Wikipedia article. Privateeih (talk) 19:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Privateeih, upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Christian LeBlanc. Feebs592 (talk) 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Lake freighter --Wannabefirefly (talk) 02:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Wannabefirefly assessed as C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Stein Valley Nlaka'pamux Heritage Park Mrfoogles (talk) 00:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Not done @Mrfoogles, it appears you have already assessed this article on 20 May 2024 as C. I do not believe this article should be re-assessed to anything other than C at this time. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I edited it a bit, then I noticed it was a stub and figured it should probably be more than that (it wasn't a stub before I edited it either, I don't think). I thought about putting it as a B, but I wasn't sure if it qualified, so I put it up here. I'll take that as it being considered a C, then. Mrfoogles (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Not done @Mrfoogles, it appears you have already assessed this article on 20 May 2024 as C. I do not believe this article should be re-assessed to anything other than C at this time. Ktkvtsh (talk) 14:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Jamath Shoffner Joeykai (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Lexi Missimo Joeykai (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Hillary Beall Joeykai (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Cornelius Williams (American football). TarheelBornBred (talk) 10:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as C. Added WikiProjects to the talk page. Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Jim Corrigan (basketball). TarheelBornBred (talk) 3:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as Start. Ktkvtsh (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Eugene Harris (basketball). TarheelBornBred (talk) 3:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as Start. Ktkvtsh (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Im Si-wan. Klorofil (talk) 07:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Sandra Paños Joeykai (talk) 13:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Bernard Barrow, a stub I've expanded. Feebs592 (talk) 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Águia de Marabá Futebol Clube. LucasMRB (talk) 20:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Patrizia Panico Joeykai (talk) 20:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Jisaburō Ozawa. Meeepmep (talk) 06:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting an initial assessment of Abigail Klein. Feebs592 (talk) 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting an initial assessment of Victory Salute (statue). SammySpartan (talk) 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @Johnsoniensis, who assessed as B, @SammySpartan. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of 1997 Prairie Dell-Jarrell tornado.MemeGod ._. (My talk page, my contributions and my creations!) 18:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done assessed as C @MemeGod27 Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, but something I noticed was that it was assessed as “low” class for weather. It’s one of the most well-known tornadoes of all time, and the outbreak article is assessed as mid-class solely because of the tornado. MemeGod ._. (My talk page, my contributions and my creations!) 21:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done assessed as C @MemeGod27 Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Silas Demary Jr.. TarheelBornBred (talk) 3:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as Start. Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Justin Hill (basketball). TarheelBornBred (talk) 3:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as Start. Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Terry Roberts (basketball). TarheelBornBred (talk) 3:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment of Noah Thomasson. TarheelBornBred (talk) 3:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @TarheelBornBred, assessed as Start. I added several citation needed notices that need attention. Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Gahanna-Lincoln High School. I don't even know how long it's been since it's been rated, but it was made in 2007, has been heavily expanded, and is honestly pretty long now. I think it has been start class for 8+ years now. MemeGod ._. (My talk page, my contributions and my creations!) 00:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Not done as there are not enough inline citations verifying statements made in the article. @MemeGod ._. please add citations or remove content that can not be verified. Then re-request assessment. Ktkvtsh (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Western Collegiate Lacrosse League. It's initial assesment was in 2010, and I have added roughly 26,000 bytes in the last 2 years. SammySpartan (talk) 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @SammySpartan, assessed as C. Please address the notice on the page regarding the need for more inline citations. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, I am wondering if someone could offer an assessment of the stub I have expanded, Literary fragment. Thanks for your time. Alsonamedbort15 (talk) 22:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @Patrick Welsh, who assessed as Start. @Alsonamedbort15, please be aware that there is a notice on the article regarding the verifiability of the lists. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! I will have a look at the lists again. Alsonamedbort15 (talk) 00:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Ktkvtsh, I wonder if you have time could you have a look at the edits I have made to the lists on the Literary fragment page? I've tried to address the verifiability by referencing where these notable examples have come from as well as incorporating the lists into the article proper. Thank you Alsonamedbort15 (talk) 03:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Alsonamedbort15, very good work. I have upgraded the assessment from Start to B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, and thanks for your time! Alsonamedbort15 (talk) 00:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Alsonamedbort15, very good work. I have upgraded the assessment from Start to B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @Patrick Welsh, who assessed as Start. @Alsonamedbort15, please be aware that there is a notice on the article regarding the verifiability of the lists. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a first assessment of Democracy in Asia. HudecEmil (talk) 20:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's my first time requesting a reassessment of any article, so please do pardon me if I make some informal requests but I think Gupta–Hunnic Wars deserves more than a C rating. Can't it be upgraded to B, GA or even an A rating? Jonharojjashi (talk) 16:32, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Not done @Jonharojjashi there are numerous issues that must be addressed before any re-assessment can take place. The lead is much too long. There are far too many statements that lack inline citations. There is also an issue with the neutrality of the article. Only after these things are addressed can we re-assess this article. Please re-request once these are fixed. Thanks. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Kyah Simon Joeykai (talk) 05:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Minnesota State Highway 36. NotDragonius (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @Imzadi1979, who assessed as B @NotDragonius. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a first assessment of Anglo-German Payments Agreement. AbsoluteWissen (talk) 13:20, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @,AbsoluteWissen, assessed as B.Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Patricia Guijarro Joeykai (talk) 15:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Wikipedia and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the article has been significantly expanded since its assessment in December 2023. Isi96 (talk) 01:25, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Midge Purce Joeykai (talk) 22:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of George W. Minns. It's initial assesment was in 2007, and I have added roughly 10,000 bytes in the last few months. SammySpartan (talk) 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done SammySpartan upgraded assessment from Stub to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 04:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Jaedyn Shaw Joeykai (talk) 22:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Joeykai, assessed as C. Expand more throughout the Early life and career sections if possible to get up to B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Requests from 2024, January to April
| |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Also, I would like a reassessment of its importance. I believe it fits the criteria high, as the page is about a world-renowned pianist. Thanks EleniXDD (talk) 09:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
|
Requests from 2023
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Requests from 2022
|
---|
|
Assessment log[edit]
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.
June 1, 2024[edit]
Removed[edit]
May 30, 2024[edit]
Renamed[edit]
- Yuri Lushchai renamed to Yuri Lushchai.
Reassessed[edit]
- Lucy Moore (archaeologist) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)