Wikipedia:WikiProject Historic sites/Assessment
Historic sites articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
FA | 1 | 6 | 21 | 35 | 63 | ||
FL | 6 | 22 | 48 | 7 | 83 | ||
FM | 52 | 52 | |||||
A | 1 | 1 | |||||
GA | 1 | 23 | 59 | 379 | 23 | 485 | |
B | 10 | 33 | 73 | 578 | 198 | 892 | |
C | 13 | 47 | 203 | 2,333 | 762 | 3,358 | |
Start | 5 | 57 | 648 | 5,881 | 1,580 | 8,171 | |
Stub | 2 | 2 | 139 | 2,291 | 10 | 747 | 3,191 |
List | 7 | 28 | 170 | 3,298 | 617 | 4,120 | |
Category | 3,236 | 3,236 | |||||
Disambig | 6 | 6 | |||||
File | 34 | 34 | |||||
Template | 142 | 142 | |||||
NA | 2 | 7 | 33 | 459 | 501 | ||
Other | 59 | 59 | |||||
Assessed | 40 | 204 | 1,342 | 14,876 | 3,998 | 3,934 | 24,394 |
Unassessed | 1 | 7 | 8 | ||||
Total | 40 | 204 | 1,342 | 14,877 | 3,998 | 3,941 | 24,402 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 77,040 | Ω = 4.77 |
Welcome to the assessment area for WikiProject Historic sites. This section focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to historic sites. 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 Historic sites}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Historic sites articles by quality and Category:Historic sites articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Instructions
[edit]An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Historic sites}} project banner on its talk page:
Syntax: {{WikiProject Historic sites|class=|importance=}}
Quality
[edit]Once tagged an article needs to be assessed using the criteria listed below. The talk page of the article should be tagged with {{WikiProject Historic sites|class=(assessment)|importance=}}.
Quality scale
[edit]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. | West Wycombe Park (as of March 19, 2009) |
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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | Listed buildings in Runcorn (as of March 10, 2009) |
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. | Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014) |
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. | Quiriguá (as of March 2, 2009) |
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. | Stonehenge (as of March 6, 2009) |
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. | Peterson House (as of March 16, 2009) |
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. | El Mirador (as of March 17, 2009) |
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. | Historic site (as of March 22, 2009) |
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. | Grade I listed buildings in North Yorkshire |
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. | {{WikiProject Historic sites}} |
Importance
[edit]This page is a guide to assessing the importance levels of articles that are maintained by WikiProject Historic sites. There are four levels of importance that give an indication as to the priority of articles to this WikiProject, as opposed to Wikipedia as a whole.
The importance levels are Top, High, Mid and Low, and are assigned by adding |importance = level to the project banner, {{WikiProject Historic sites|class=|importance=}}, on the article's talk page. A DRAFT guide to the type of articles that should be placed in each category is given below, but these are not hard and fast rules. Any individual article should be assessed on its own merits. If you are unable to decide which importance level to use, please go to the WP:Historic sites talk page and leave a message there.
Remember:
|
Importance | Criteria | Example |
---|---|---|
Top | Sites of global significance, including lists and registers thereof; sites known to most educated persons in the world. | World Heritage Sites, e.g. Giza pyramid complex |
High | Sites of continental or national significance, including lists and registers thereof; sites known to most people in a given country. | List of National Historic Sites of Canada |
Mid | Sites of regional (sub-national) significance, including lists and registers thereof; sites known to many people in a given territory such as a U.S. state Grade I listed buildings. |
Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monument Wells Cathedral |
Low | Sites of local significance, including lists and registers thereof; sites generally known (if at all) only to people living nearby Grade II* & Grade II listed buildings. |
Obélisque d'Arles Observatory, Bristol |
??? | Unassessed, importance still to be determined. |
Statistics
[edit]Bot generated tables that cover the assessment processes of WikiProject Historic sites are listed below. The stats are generated automatically every 2 – 7 days, but they can be updated manually by entering Historic sites (and replacing Foobar) into the Category box here.