Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment: Difference between revisions
→Requesting an assessment: Reply |
→Requesting an assessment: Reply |
||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
* Requesting reassessment of [[Regina's historic buildings and precincts]]. It's currently rated a "B" class, but I think that's way over-rated, for reasons discussed on the Talk page. I'm not familiar with how assessments work and would like a new pair of eyes looking at it. I will try to improve it, but I think it needs a new baseline to start with. [[User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz|Mr Serjeant Buzfuz]] ([[User talk:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz|talk]]) 03:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
* Requesting reassessment of [[Regina's historic buildings and precincts]]. It's currently rated a "B" class, but I think that's way over-rated, for reasons discussed on the Talk page. I'm not familiar with how assessments work and would like a new pair of eyes looking at it. I will try to improve it, but I think it needs a new baseline to start with. [[User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz|Mr Serjeant Buzfuz]] ([[User talk:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz|talk]]) 03:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
*:{{Already done}} by @[[User:BattyBot|BattyBot]], who assessed as B. [[User:Ktkvtsh|Ktkvtsh]] ([[User talk:Ktkvtsh|talk]]) 22:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* Requesting reassessment of [[ICIMOD]]. I have completely rewritten this page over September 2022 - April 2024, added several sections and categories to it. Its existing assessment was done in 2006. The article stands significantly improved, and is of interest to several Wikiprojects in addition to those originally visible on its talk page. ([[User talk: Apandeyhp89|talk]]) 28 April 2024 |
* Requesting reassessment of [[ICIMOD]]. I have completely rewritten this page over September 2022 - April 2024, added several sections and categories to it. Its existing assessment was done in 2006. The article stands significantly improved, and is of interest to several Wikiprojects in addition to those originally visible on its talk page. ([[User talk: Apandeyhp89|talk]]) 28 April 2024 |
||
*:{{Done}} upgraded assessment to C. [[User:Ktkvtsh|Ktkvtsh]] ([[User talk:Ktkvtsh|talk]]) 22:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
*:{{Done}} upgraded assessment to C. [[User:Ktkvtsh|Ktkvtsh]] ([[User talk:Ktkvtsh|talk]]) 22:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:20, 4 May 2024
Wikipedia articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
FL | 1 | 1 | |||||
GA | 3 | 12 | 15 | ||||
B | 8 | 6 | 12 | 16 | 42 | ||
C | 6 | 32 | 41 | 62 | 141 | ||
Start | 15 | 63 | 130 | 1 | 209 | ||
Stub | 10 | 40 | 50 | ||||
List | 2 | 1 | 7 | 6 | 16 | ||
Category | 114 | 114 | |||||
Disambig | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
File | 44 | 44 | |||||
Project | 2 | 4 | 3 | 156 | 165 | ||
Redirect | 1 | 7 | 42 | 92 | 142 | ||
Template | 2 | 36 | 38 | ||||
Other | 3 | 7 | 10 | ||||
Assessed | 16 | 58 | 149 | 317 | 449 | 1 | 990 |
Total | 16 | 58 | 149 | 317 | 449 | 1 | 990 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 2,060 | Ω = 4.52 |
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
- 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
Quality assessments
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) | ??? |
Quality scale
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. | 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
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) | ??? |
Importance scale
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
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 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. Very good article. Could use some more expanding. Ktkvtsh (talk) 04:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- ➡ Requests from April 2024: ⬇
- Requesting reassessment of Patrick_Troughton. It's been "Start Class for a while, but I feel it is at least a C if not a B. Rankersbo (talk) 12:30, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Regina's historic buildings and precincts. It's currently rated a "B" class, but I think that's way over-rated, for reasons discussed on the Talk page. I'm not familiar with how assessments work and would like a new pair of eyes looking at it. I will try to improve it, but I think it needs a new baseline to start with. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Already done by @BattyBot, who assessed as B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of ICIMOD. I have completely rewritten this page over September 2022 - April 2024, added several sections and categories to it. Its existing assessment was done in 2006. The article stands significantly improved, and is of interest to several Wikiprojects in addition to those originally visible on its talk page. (talk) 28 April 2024
- Done upgraded assessment to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment of Mount Scenery. I've added 10,000+ bytes (three new sections, references, images). Last assessment was Stub. Wondering if now C or B. Thank you! CareAhLine (talk) 01:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment to B. @CareAhLine Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:16, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting an assessment of Money Money 2020. I've added over 4,000 bytes to the article, an entirely new section, added citations for almost all claims on the article and generally cleaned it up a lot. I no longer believe it should be classed as a stub. Beachweak (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment to Start @Beachweak Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a re-assessment of Meralgia paraesthetica. I have added 10,000 bytes, doubling the article size, and my edits are so extensive that I now have 80% authorship of the content. Snake playing a saxaphone (talk) 07:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Upgraded assessment to B @Snake playing a saxaphone Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment for Orbital (1991 album). I've updated the page significantly and replaced unreliable sources with more reliable ones. Also, I think this page was last assessed in 2009, and I think there has been plenty of new information added since then, not just from me. Tedster41 (talk) 20:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Upgraded from Start to C assessment. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment for Transvaal Park. I've added over 6,000 bytes of information since it's initial review. – ReaganMc101 20:01, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded from Start to C. I would suggest adding a citation at the end of the lead. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment for Yelabuga drone factory. I've added about 10,600 bytes since its initial assessment of Stub Class. Thank you! – Primium (talk) 17:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassessment for Movement of the First. I've added over 15,000 bytes of information since it's initial review. – Primium (talk) 17:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Upgraded assessment to B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting a reassesment for Shahed drones. I've added about 30,000 bytes since its previous review, which scored it at Stub Class. Rater predicts B or higher with 93.2% confidence. – Primium (talk) 16:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Upgraded assessment to B. Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for 2018–19 Point Loma Nazarene Sea Lions men's basketball team. JTtheOG (talk) 08:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Assessed as C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for 321 Coffee, which was added to the mainspace on April 12 but has undergone significant revisions. Currently ranked at Start-class, but I believe it should be C- or maybe even B-Class. Dallasoliver (talk) 19:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting an assessment for Amie Parnes, which was just added to the mainspace yesterday. Currently ranked at Start-class, but Rater is predicting a rating of B-Class or higher with 93.9% accuracy. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 05:17, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 16:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Requesting an assesment for Draft:Hirohara Shrine. A user with the name User:WC gudang inspirasi disregarded WP:AFCREVIEW and moved the page from Draftspace to Mainspace. Reverted back but assesment scale still asses it as 'redirect', halting the review process. the same user have done the same unauthorized moves with other draft articles and moving it to Mainspace. Kaliper1 (talk) 02:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Retracted, Fixed!- Requesting an assessment for Minia Biabiany. I have updated its sources, which appeared to be its main issue. User:ScorpioSunLibraMoon (talk) 9:50, 21 April (EST)
- Done User:ScorpioSunLibraMoon, upgraded assessment from Start to C.
- Requesting an assessment for Community gardens in New York City. It has been expanded upon since its original assessment in 2019. 9H48F (talk) 02:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment to B @9H48F Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:12, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Tone_(linguistics), it has been significantly expanded upon and reliable sources have been added with greater detail. Justanotherinternetguyt@lk 13:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Justanotherinternetguy upgraded assessment from Start to C. This could be a B article, though there is a need for more inline citations. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:11, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for George Robert Carruthers which I have significantly modified and expanded. Physhist (talk) 10:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Assessed as B-class. Great effort. Make sure to verify anything without a citation - it looks like that honorary doctorate may have been fabricated. Reconrabbit 18:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Pottawatomie Park, which I have just created. Dan • ✉ 06:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Already done assessed as C by @Slgrandson Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Thomas Baker (Alaska politician). I have expanded the article significantly Sipik06 (talk)
- Done upgraded assessment from Stub to Start. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Botswana after re-reading, adding sources, updating data and images, adding context, and paragraphs. I would like to know if it is B-class worthy. 48JcL48 (talk) (contribs) 02:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Already done assessed as B by @48JcL48 Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:07, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Diocese of Churches for the Sake of Others, which has been completely rewritten after COI editing and copyvios. Dclemens1971 (talk) 01:40, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded assessment from Start to Stub. Ktkvtsh (talk) 22:09, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Ralph Brazelton Peck which I've updated and expanded. D McParland (talk) 23:05, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done @D McParland, upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for Carson Beck. I believe that the article should be assessed higher than start class following updates and expansions.--BullDawg2021 (talk) 21:56, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done @BullDawg2021, upgraded assessment from Start to C. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting assessment for 1955 riots at the Pakistani embassy and consulates in Afghanistan, the page has been gone through enough changes so i put it up for assessment. Rahim231 (talk) 15:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done upgraded from Start to C @Rahim231 Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting an assessment of Swim School, it has undergone some improvements by me & another editor and want an opinion! :) Georgeykiwi (talk 23:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done assessed as B-class. Still needs some copyedits here and there but overall, great work! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 06:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of S. L. Rose. The page has been expanded greatly since it was originally ranked a stub when I first created it, and it definitely merits more than a stub in its current state. TarheelBornBred (talk 02:32, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done assessed as C-class; consider expanding the Business subsection.
- Requesting assessment of Dirty Epic. It used to be a redirect but I have turned into a page and I would like to get it assessed as it has not been done so yet. Tedster41 (talk) 09:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Already done assessed as C by @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Carl Bunch. Originally ranked as a stub, I've expanded the page significantly. Rater predicts the article could be considered as B or higher with 86% accuracy. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 19:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done assessed as C @Pac-Man PHD. To get to B, it will need more independent sources and more information in each section. Go into more detail please. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Requesting reassessment of Remembrance Day (Hong Kong), which I created and expanded, for C class. CanonNi (talk) 07:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not done @CanonNi, as it is still Start. To get to C, the article will need more inline citations and more information. After reading, I am left wanting more on the topic. Please do this and re-request assessment. Ktkvtsh (talk) 21:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Requests from 2024, January to March
| |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
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.
September 26, 2024
Renamed
- Module:Sandbox/Awesome Aasim/I18n renamed to Module:I18n.
Assessed
- Module:I18n (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Template-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Draft:Jose Vericat (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
September 25, 2024
Assessed
- Draft:Nikhil Soni (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Draft:RMB Justize (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
September 22, 2024
Assessed
- Internet bot (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Mabel Evelyn Elliott (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
September 21, 2024
Removed
- Internet bot (talk) removed.