Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music/Assessment
Article rating and assessment scheme[edit]
An article rating and assessment scheme has been implemented for articles identified as being of interest to WikiProject Alternative music. In doing so, articles may be rated in the following ways:
- an assessment of their class (overall quality), and
- an assessment of their importance (priority or relative significance).
The primary purpose of this rating and assessment scheme is to provide project members and editors with a sub-categorized survey of the current status of Alternative music-related articles, which can then be used to prioritize the overall workload and highlight articles needing improvements at various stages.
For example, higher-priority articles (those most essential to any encyclopedia) in need of most work (such as lower quality) can be readily identified for attention and collaboration.
Instructions[edit]
An article's assessment is recorded via the use of certain parameters of the {{Wikiproject Alternative music}} project banner, which is affixed to the talk pages of in-scope articles.
The two parameters used for this exercise are class (indicates an assessment of the article's current overall quality) and importance (indicates an assessment of the relative priority or significance of the particular article to general knowledge of alternative music-related topics). Usage summary (note the parameters are in lowercase):
- {{Wikiproject Alternative music|class=??? |importance=??? }}
These parameters flag the article according to the values chosen (which then appear on the project banner), and also assign the article to a corresponding category. The possible values of these parameters and guidance criteria on which value to choose are detailed below: see Importance scale for the importance parameter and Quality scale for the class parameter.
Importance scale[edit]
The following values may be used for the importance parameter (they should be entered exactly as given):
| Value | Meaning | Examples | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
| Top | "Key" articles, considered indispensable | Alternative rock, Nirvana (band) | Category:Top-importance Alternative music articles |
| High | High-priority topics and needed subtopics of "key" articles, often with a broad scope; needed to complement any general understanding of the field | Gothic rock, Eddie Vedder, "Smells Like Teen Spirit" | Category:High-importance Alternative music articles |
| Mid | Mid-priority articles on more specialised (sub-)topics; possibly more detailed coverage of topics summarised in "key" articles, and as such their omission would not significantly impair general understanding | Better Than Ezra, "This Charming Man" |
Category:Mid-importance Alternative music articles |
| Low | While still notable, these are highly specialised or even obscure, not essential for understanding the wider picture ("nice to have" articles) | Freak folk, Loose Fur | Category:Low-importance Alternative music articles |
The importance parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. If the importance parameter is not yet set, or contains an invalid value, the article will be assigned to Category:Unassigned-importance Alternative music articles.
Quality scale[edit]
Each article may also be assigned to a particular class, intended as a point-in-time assessment of its overall "quality" - relative to the criteria given in the quality scale which is detailed below.
This quality scale follows the definitions employed at the Version 1.0 Editorial Team's assessment system.
The following values may be used for the class parameter (they should be entered exactly as given):
| Value | Meaning | Examples | Category |
|---|---|---|---|
 FA{{FA-Class}} |
Articles which are currently Featured status articles | R.E.M., Grunge | Category:FA-Class Alternative music articles |
 A{{A-Class}} |
A-class articles; complete, or almost complete, detailed coverage of the subject; referenced, well-written, with a little more work could be submitted for FA | OK Computer | Category:A-Class Alternative music articles |
 GA{{GA-Class}} |
Articles with a current Good article status | "In Bloom", Double Nickels on the Dime | Category:GA-Class Alternative music articles |
| B {{B-Class}} |
B-class articles; "general" standard articles, reasonably informative, cover main points, no glaring problems, scope for expansion and improvement | Dinosaur Jr., SST Records | Category:B-Class Alternative music articles |
| C {{C-Class}} |
C-class articles; article is substantial, but still missing key components or contains a lot of irrelevant material. Under developed and under-sourced, usually in need of a fair amount of cleanup. | Shoegazing, Meat Puppets | Category:C-Class Alternative music articles |
| Start {{Start-Class}} |
Start-class articles; more than a stub, but still severely lacking and may neglect to include significant aspects of a topic's history altogether. A poorly developed article that needs major attention. | Dave Navarro, Architecture in Helsinki | Category:Start-Class Alternative music articles |
| Stub {{Stub-Class}} |
Stub-class articles; minimally-informative, brief, barely give more than the shortest outline of the subject | "Pictures of You (The Last Goodnight song)", Aztec Camera | Category:Stub-Class Alternative music articles |
| NA | Not applicable; i.e. for miscellaneous pages such as disambiguation pages or project pages, which do not require an assessment | Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music | Category:NA-Class Alternative music articles |
Historical counts[edit]
| December 2006 | January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | April 2007 | May 2007 | June 2007 | July 2007 | August 2007 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FA
|
4 | 1.30 % | 5 | 1.13 % | 5 | 1.06 % | 6 | 1.13 % | 11 | 1.97 % | 13 | 2.16 % | 15 | 2.31 % | 20 | 2.91 % | 22 | 3.08 % |
| A
|
0 | 0 % | 5 | 1.13 % | 5 | 1.06 % | 8 | 1.50 % | 6 | 1.07 % | 6 | 1.00 % | 8 | 1.23 % | 7 | 1.02 % | 6 | 0.84 % |
| GA
|
20 | 6.51 % | 18 | 4.08 % | 20 | 4.26 % | 19 | 3.57 % | 22 | 3.94 % | 22 | 3.65 % | 25 | 3.86 % | 33 | 4.80 % | 36 | 5.03 % |
| B | 9 | 2.93 % | 87 | 19.73 % | 90 | 19.15 % | 95 | 17.86 % | 95 | 17.00 % | 107 | 17.74 % | 112 | 17.28 % | 109 | 15.87 % | 121 | 16.92 % |
| Start | 1 | 0.33 % | 214 | 48.53 % | 225 | 47.87 % | 235 | 44.17 % | 269 | 48.12 % | 283 | 46.93 % | 302 | 46.60 % | 325 | 47.31 % | 338 | 47.27 % |
| Stub | 1 | 0.33 % | 98 | 22.22 % | 125 | 26.60 % | 132 | 24.81 % | 156 | 27.91 % | 166 | 27.53 % | 186 | 28.70 % | 193 | 28.09 % | 191 | 26.71 % |
| Unassessed | 272 | 88.60 % | 14 | 3.17 % | 0 | 0 % | 37 | 6.95 % | 0 | 0 % | 6 | 1.00% | 0 | 0 % | 0 | 0 % | 1 | 0.14 % |
| Total | 307 | 441 | 470 | 532 | 559 | 603 | 648 | 687 | 715 | |||||||||
| October 2007 | November 2007 | December 2007 | January 2008 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FA
|
33 | 4.45 % | 38 | 5.00 % | 48 | 5.76 % | 53 | 5.98 % | 64 | 6.75 % |
| A
|
4 | 0.54 % | 3 | 0.39 % | 5 | 0.60 % | 6 | 0.68 % | 3 | 0.32 % |
| GA
|
42 | 5.67 % | 46 | 6.05 % | 45 | 5.40 % | 59 | 6.66 % | 61 | 6.43 % |
| B | 120 | 16.19 % | 129 | 16.97 % | 135 | 16.21 % | 143 | 16.14 % | 150 | 15.82 % |
| Start | 351 | 47.37 % | 358 | 47.10 % | 391 | 46.94 % | 397 | 44.81 % | 432 | 45.47 % |
| Stub | 189 | 25.51 % | 186 | 24.47 % | 209 | 25.10 % | 227 | 25.62 % | 238 | 25.11 % |
| Unassessed | 2 | 0.27 % | 0 | 0.00 % | 0 | 0.00 % | 1 | 0.11 % | 0 | 0.00 % |
| Total | 741 | 760 | 833 | 886 | 948 | |||||