Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Appalachia/Assessment: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; ">{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Appalachia articles by quality statistics}}</div>
<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; ">{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Appalachia articles by quality statistics}}</div>
Welcome to the '''assessment department''' of the Appalachia WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Appalachia related 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.
Welcome to the '''assessment department''' of WikiProject Appalachia! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Appalachia related 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.


The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{tl|WikiProject Appalachia}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of [[:Category:Appalachia articles by quality]], which serve as the foundation for an [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Appalachia articles by quality|automatically generated worklist]].
The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{tl|WikiProject Appalachia}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of [[:Category:Appalachia articles by quality]], which serve as the foundation for an [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Appalachia articles by quality|automatically generated worklist]].

Revision as of 03:31, 11 February 2024

Appalachia
articles
Importance Refresh
 Top   High   Mid   Low  ???  Total
Quality  FA 0 0 0 0 0 8
 A 0 0 0 0 0 0
 GA 0 0 0 0 0 22
B 0 0 0 0 0 115
C 0 0 0 0 0 284
Start 0 0 0 0 0 434
Stub 0 0 0 0 0 104
 FL 0 0 0 0 0 0
List 0 0 0 0 0 10
??? 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 35 53 110 234 577 1009

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Appalachia! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Appalachia related 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

How do I add an article to the Appalachia WikiProject?
Just add {{WikiProject Appalachia}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
How can I get my article rated?
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of the Appalachia WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
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 my article?
This does not exist for this project yet. Perhaps you could join the project and create a peer review system?
What if I don't agree with a quality 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.
What if I don't agree with an importance rating?
If you believe an item is mis-classed or its class has since changed, please list it in the Requesting an assessment with your reasons. Please see the importance scale below and make sure your claims follow the criteria listed.
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!
How can I keep track of changes in article ratings?
A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the monthly statistics may be more accessible.
Can I review my own article?
You may not rate your own articles. New articles should be added to the peer review section of assessment. Large changes to articles that may change the quality should be added to the Requesting an assessment section. Articles that may need a change in Importance status should be listed in the Importance review section.
Exception: editors who create articles and/or files can assess the following classifications: Start, Stub, List, Category, Disambig, File, Portal, Project, Redirect, or Template. Self-classification of "start" articles should be used sparingly as most new articles tend to be "stubs" -- the remaining classifications are procedural in nature and can be applied as apporpriate. However, if an article creator thinks the article should be C, B, A, GA, FA, or FL, they should leave it unassessed and request an assessment.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department, or to contact the project coordinators directly.

Instructions

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

{{WikiProject Appalachia| class= }} (This is currently the only option)

While assessing articles, please rate the class with a capital letter. This will insure uniformity on the template.

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

Quality scale