Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|||
| Project navigation links | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Main project page | talk | ||
| Portal | talk | ||
| Protected areas task force | Talk | ||
| Noticeboard | talk | ||
| Watchlist | |||
| Departments: | |||
| → Assessment | talk | ||
| → Collaboration | talk | ||
| → Translation | talk | ||
| → Peer review | talk | ||
| Useful links | |||
| Deletion sorting | |||
| Infoboxes and templates | |||
| Open tasks | |||
| Project category | |||
| Stub templates | |||
| edit · changes | |||
One of the main tasks of the WikiProject Africa is to assess the quality of Wikipedia's Africa articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to help in recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work. They also play a role in the WP:1.0 program, which the WikiProject uses to help automate some of the assessing process.
The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{AfricaProject}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Africa articles by quality, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. WP:1.0 also produces a statistics page, and a log of articles asessed.
[edit] How to assess
An article's assessment is generated on its talkpage from the class parameter in {{AfricaProject}}, the WikiProject's banner. To add the banner, add the following to its talkpage:
- {{AfricaProject|class=}}
To add an assessment, simply fill in the class parameter with the appropriate letters. The following values may be used:
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Africa articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as featured articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Africa articles;
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Africa articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as good articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Africa articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Africa articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Africa articles)
- NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article Africa pages)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Africa articles. The criteria for the different classes is below.
| Africa articles |
Importance | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Top | High | Mid | Low | None | Total | ||
| Quality | |||||||
| 7 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 18 | 37 | ||
| 1 | 3 | 4 | |||||
| 1 | 1 | 2 | |||||
| 7 | 5 | 10 | 7 | 18 | 47 | ||
| B | 61 | 58 | 48 | 28 | 207 | 402 | |
| C | 2 | 19 | 23 | 12 | 45 | 101 | |
| Start | 36 | 198 | 380 | 437 | 1968 | 3019 | |
| Stub | 31 | 263 | 587 | 4618 | 12101 | 17600 | |
| List | 1 | 4 | 20 | 67 | 373 | 465 | |
| Assessed | 145 | 552 | 1072 | 5174 | 14734 | 21677 | |
| Unassessed | 2 | 8 | 16 | 27 | 2821 | 2874 | |
| Total | 147 | 560 | 1088 | 5201 | 17555 | 24551 | |
[edit] Quality scale
WikiProject Africa uses the same criteria for grading articles as set out by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. If you are not sure what class an article falls under, leave a note on the WikiProject's talkpage, and someone will help you out.
| Label | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
{{FA-Class}} |
The article has attained Featured article status.
|
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. | Tourette Syndrome (as of June 2008) |
||
{{FL-Class}} |
The article has attained Featured list status.
|
FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives (as of January 2008) |
||||
{{A-Class}} |
The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
|
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help. | Durian (as of March 2007) |
||
{{GA-Class}} |
The article has attained Good article status.
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. | 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. | International Space Station (as of February 2007) |
||
| B {{B-Class}} |
The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach Good Article standards. B-Class articles should meet the six B-Class criteria.
|
No reader should be 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, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the manual of style and related style guidelines. | Jammu and Kashmir (as of October 2007) |
||
| C {{C-Class}} |
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup.
|
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 address cleanup issues. | Exeter Cathedral (as of June 2008) |
||
| Start {{Start-Class}} |
An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.
|
Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more. | Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation. | Real analysis (as of November 2006) |
||
| Stub {{Stub-Class}} |
A very basic description of the topic.
|
Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. | Coffee table book (as of July 2005) |

