Wikipedia:WikiProject Myanmar/Assessment
 |
| WikiProject Myanmar |
|---|
|
Founded |
|
Shortcuts |
|
General information |
|
Departments |
|
Resources |
| Myanmar articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
 FA
|
1 | 5 | 1 | 7 | |||
| FM
|
12 | 12 | |||||
 GA
|
2 | 13 | 16 | 1 | 32 | ||
| B | 5 | 22 | 70 | 62 | 9 | 168 | |
| C | 10 | 48 | 145 | 268 | 61 | 532 | |
| Start | 10 | 69 | 551 | 1,453 | 352 | 2,435 | |
| Stub | 11 | 254 | 3,705 | 948 | 4,918 | ||
| List | 4 | 31 | 114 | 4 | 66 | 219 | |
| Category | 2,571 | 2,571 | |||||
| Disambig | 50 | 50 | |||||
| File | 52 | 52 | |||||
| Portal | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Project | 23 | 23 | |||||
| Redirect | 3 | 27 | 124 | 257 | 411 | ||
| Template | 1 | 239 | 240 | ||||
| NA | 4 | 4 | |||||
| Other | 17 | 17 | |||||
| Assessed | 25 | 159 | 1,092 | 5,748 | 3,230 | 1,438 | 11,692 |
| Unassessed | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Total | 25 | 159 | 1,092 | 5,748 | 3,230 | 1,439 | 11,693 |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 44,379 | Ω = 5.48 | |||||
Welcome to the assessment department of the Myanmar WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Myanmar or the people of Myanmar. 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 Myanmar (Burma)}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Myanmar articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Frequently asked questions
[edit]- 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 Myanmar WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
- 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. Alternately, you can ask any member of the project to rate the article again.
- 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!
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.
Instructions
[edit]Quality assessments
[edit]An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Burma (Myanmar)}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.
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 Myanmar articles) | FA |
|
| A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Myanmar articles) |  A |
|
| GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Myanmar articles) | GA |
|
| B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Myanmar articles) | B | |
| C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Myanmar articles) | C | |
| Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Myanmar articles) | Start | |
| Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Myanmar articles) | Stub | |
| FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Myanmar articles) | FL |
|
| List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Myanmar articles) | List |
For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:
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. | 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; 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:
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. | Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019) |
| 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. | Psychology (as of January 2024) |
| 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. | Wing (as of June 2018) |
| 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. | Ball (as of September 2014) |
| 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. | Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014) |
| 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 literary movements |
Importance assessments
[edit]An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Burma (Myanmar)}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Burma (Myanmar)|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 Myanmar articles) | Top | |
| High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Myanmar articles) | High | |
| Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Myanmar articles) | Mid | |
| Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Myanmar articles) | Low | |
| NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Myanmar articles) | NA | |
| ??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Myanmar articles) | ??? |
Importance scale
[edit]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 Myanmar.
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. | Kindergarten |
| High | Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Factory Acts |
| Mid | Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | 0.999... |
| 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. | G cell |
| Bottom | Subject is of the lowest level of relevance or significance to its field of study. | International Cricket (video game) |
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.
- Irrawaddy River - Significant additions have been made to the article over the past few months, though it is still listed as Stub-class. Can someone reassess the article and leave a few to-dos? Thanks in advance, Pim Rijkee (talk) 13:27, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
- Shooting an Elephant has had some (significant) additions. Could you take a look? - Skittles the hog (talk) 20:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Internal conflict in Myanmar - I have worked a lot on this article over the past four months, correcting a lot of grammatical mistakes, punctuation, sentence strucutre, etc. I was wondering if it could be re-evaluated. - CentreLeftRight ✉ 06:14, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
- Philip Adolphe Klier and Max Henry Ferrars are two articles on foreign photographers active in British Burma towards the end of the 19th century. I have added photographs that illustrate their work documenting the society of Burma in those years.Munfarid1 (User:Munfarid1talk) 13:37, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- Aungpan- I am from this town and I contributed a lot to this article over the past two months, adding additional information, reliable sources, and illustrations. Could you guys please take a look at it and reconsider the rating. It would help a lot, thank you in advance, Kmthu.ytu (talk) 13:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Assessment log
[edit]- The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.
Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.
November 22, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- Burmese cuisine (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Draft:Pauk Ko Taw (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
[edit]- Draft:Burmese-Chinese cuisine (talk) removed.
- Draft:Opium Weights (talk) removed.
- Draft:Par Yel (talk) removed.
November 21, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]Assessed
[edit]- 2004 Asian Wushu Championships (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
November 20, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]Assessed
[edit]- 1960–1961 campaign at the China–Burma border (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Mid-Class. (rev · t)
November 19, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]- Draft:The Banhong Incident renamed to Draft:Banhong Incident.
Assessed
[edit]- Draft:Banhong Incident (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Burmese people of Swedish descent (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Swedish people of Burmese descent (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Western Pwo alphabet (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
November 18, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- Aung San (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from High-Class to Top-Class. (rev · t)
- Lanse (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Cephalotaxus hainanensis (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Myanmar women's national futsal team (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Draft:The Banhong Incident (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
November 17, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1385–1391) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1401–1403) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1408–1410) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1410–1412) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1412–1414) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1414–1415) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1416–1418) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1422–1423) orders of battle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Military rule in Burma (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Category-Class to Redirect-Class. (rev · t)
Worklist
[edit]- The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.
 | This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
This page was once used by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is preserved because of the information in its edit history. This page should not be edited or deleted. Wikiproject article lists can be generated using the WP 1.0 web tool.