Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Crystal personal.svg WikiProject Biography
General information (edit · changes)
Work groups and subprojects
Things you can do (edit)
  • Assess an article

Biography article statistics

This list is generated automatically on alternate nights.
view full worklist


Welcome to the assessment department of the Biography WikiProject. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Biography articles. 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.

Category:Biography articles by quality serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Biography}} project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the {{WikiProject Biography}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Biography articles by quality.

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How can I get an article rated? 
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles? 
Any member of the Biography 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!
How may I begin assessing articles? 
Assessment may be done through a variety of ways, but the most efficient is through use of the MetaData article assessment script.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

Instructions on how to assess a Biography article[edit]

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Biography}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed biography articles. At present, there are over 100,000 biography articles that need assessment (e.g., that need to have a class inserted in the class parameter of the {{WikiProject Biography}} template).

Biography articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{WikiProject Biography}} template on their talk page, but the template may be incomplete. Select an article from the list at Category:Unassessed biography articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{WikiProject Biography}} template. Finally, add in the proper parameters to the talk page template, as outlined below.

Class parameter[edit]

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed biography articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Priority parameter[edit]

The following values may be used for the priority parameter:

  • Top
  • High
  • Mid
  • Low

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the priority scale below. Note that the priority is used on the workgroup lists only.

Core parameter[edit]

The template also has a core=yes parameter for core articles only, as selected by the Core Biographies team.

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Priority scale[edit]

Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If priority values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the biography falls under. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority 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).

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top High probability that non-Historians would look this up. Limited to the top 200 biographies. Must have had a large impact outside of their main discipline, across several generations, and in the majority of the world. For instance, Einstein, brilliant physicist, but his theories have affected people outside of physics and in many other countries besides his nation of origin and several generations. His ideas have changed the way people think. No member should give this rating to any biography without first getting Project approval from the other members. Albert Einstein
High Must have had a large impact in their main discipline, across a couple of generations. Had some impact outside their country of origin. Patrick Henry
Mid Important in their discipline. John Seigenthaler, Sr.
Low Subject is notable in their main discipline. Morena Baccarin

08:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)08:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)08:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)08:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Requesting an assessment[edit]

If you would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for an article, please feel free to list it below.
Note: This is only to rate the article on quality - you will probably not get feedback on the article.
If you desire comments please use the peer review process.
If you assess an article, please remove it so others will not waste time reviewing the same article(s).
It is also helpful to leave a brief note on article's talk, under a heading "B-class review", stating why the article was failed (or that it was reviewed and passed).
Make sure to check the overview on how to assess a Biography article for details on how to assess. Thanks!

Articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B'; see Wikipedia:Good articles and Wikipedia:Featured articles for higher assessments.
Edit this section and place request here:

  1. Georges C. Benjamin - Newly-created article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 09:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
  2. Herbert John Webber Chris Troutman (talk) 23:00, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  3. A. Vincent
  4. A. W. Shepard
  5. A. W. Tillinghast
  6. A. Wade Boykin
  7. A. Whitney Brown
  8. A.i. (band)
  9. A//Political
  10. AD Boyz
  11. AJ Rafael
  12. AJ Roach
  13. AM (musician)
  14. ASP (band)
  15. ATL (band)
  16. ATMA (electronic musician)
  17. A Challenge of Honour
  18. A Change of Pace
  19. A Formal Sigh
  20. A Great Big Pile of Leaves
  21. A Hawk and a Hacksaw
  22. A K Bera
  23. A Skillz
  24. A Thorn for Every Heart
  25. A Touch of Class (band)
  26. A Tribe of Toffs
  27. A Witness
  28. Aad Steylen
  29. Aadel Bülow-Hansen
  30. Aadhi (actor)
  31. Aadi (Telugu actor)
  32. Aadukalam Murugadoss
  33. Aafje Heynis
  34. Aage B. Sørensen
  35. Aage Storstein
  36. Aagje Deken
  37. Aaldert Wapstra
  38. Aaly Tokombaev
  39. Aameen Taqi Butt
  40. Aamir Hayat Khan Rokhri
  41. Aamir Ikram - a bucket of articles for reassessing. --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 16:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
  42. Yulianna
  43. Stephen V. Cameron Dk3298371 (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
  44. Natasha Raikhel - Chris Troutman (talk) 03:29, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  45. William Rotsler - This was essentially an unsourced bio, so it should rate better now. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:30, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  46. Francis Cabot Lowell (businessman) --LibraryGurl (talk) 19:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  47. Guy Halsall - article recently improved. Kirsa14 (talk) 18:46, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  48. James George (diplomat) - new from scratch —KGF0 ( T | C ) 21:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
  49. Joan Murrell Owens - expanded from stub Dgorsline (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  50. Frank J. Larkin - Newly-created article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  51. Earl MacDonald - article has been completely revised and needs reassessment. Paul Gruhn 20:37, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  52. Nicole Galloway - Newly-created article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 01:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  53. Benjamin Clementine
  54. Irena Sendler --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  55. Carly Fiorina for reassessment. Revised and expanded; newsworthiness. Note other Wikipedia projects. Make suggestions. Ca.papavero (talk) 20:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
This article has recently been upgraded. Since then, more progress made again. Moving fast. Now reaching between B and GA class. Ca.papavero (talk) 08:08, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  1. The Gothard Sisters for reassessment. Multiple issues have been addressed to improve the article. Thanks in advance for reviewing it. Dontreader (talk) 00:56, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
  2. Mick Fleetwood Heavily revised since last assessment. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 20:06, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  3. Bernie Sanders is a year 2016 presidential candidate and yet the article is ranked C class of mid importance, which is not consistent with other candidates. See Carly Fiorina above, for example, or even Hillary Clinton. The Sanders article needs much attention and recommendations in term of quality; such as copious citations, standardization and so on. But, it's current status, in terms of importance, lumps it with 457 other articles, which is not appropriate. It should be of "high" to top "priority", moving it to a grouping of 166 to 14 articles of that same ranking. From there, it can move more quickly up the scale in quality, where it should be. Ca.papavero (talk) 20:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  4. Michael Johnston (Colorado legislator) - Article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 22:24, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  5. Owen Tudor - article lacked citations which I have now added - probably better than Start but would appreciate feedbackNorfolkbigfish (talk) 14:22, 26 May 2015 (UTC)


Current status[edit]

Historical counts[edit]

Monthly changes[edit]

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.

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality log


The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.