Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page Talk page Open tasks New articles Article assessment Outreach Resources Showcase Members
Flag-map of Greece.svg WikiProject Greece [ edit · changes ]

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Greece! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Greece and Greek related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the WP:1.0 program,

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPGR}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Greek articles by quality.

FAQ[edit]

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 {{WPGR}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WPGR}} 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 talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
4. Who can assess articles? 
Any member of the Greece WikiProject 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 that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
6. Are there any special procedures in order to rate an article as A-Class? 
Any member of the project can rate an article as A-Class, because in our project there is no A-Class review process as happens in other projects (e.g. in WP:MILHIST). Members of the project should keep the criteria for featured articles in mind when rating an article as A-Class. However, please note that (unlike actual featured articles) A-Class articles are not expected to fully meet all of the criteria; a comprehensive, accurate, well-sourced, and decently-written article should qualify for A-Class status even if it could use some further copyediting. An article, which has not reached GA status or has not passed successfully a formal A-Class review in another project should not be rated as A-Class.
7. Can I request that someone else rate an article? 
Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
8. 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.
9. Where can I get more comments about an article? 
The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
10. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
11. 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!
12. What if I have a question not listed here? 
If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.

Assessment instructions[edit]

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPGR}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WPGR|class=???}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Quality scale for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Greek articles) Featured article FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Greek articles) A-Class article A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Greek articles)  GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Greek articles) B-Class article B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Greek articles) C-Class article C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Greek articles) Start-Class article Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Greek articles) Stub-Class article Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Greek articles) Featured list FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Greek articles)  List 

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Greek articles) Category page Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Greek articles) Disambiguation page Disambig 
File (for files; adds pages to Category:File-Class Greek articles)  File 
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Greek articles) Redirect page Redirect 
Template (for templates; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Greek articles)  Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Greek articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Greek articles)  ??? 

Quality scale[edit]

Label Criteria Formal process Example
Featured article FA
{{FA-Class}}
Reserved for articles that meet the featured article criteria and have received featured article status after community review. Featured article candidates Hippocrates (as of November 2010)
A-Class article A
{{A-Class}}
Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. The Project lacks its own A-Class review process. Articles that have been reviewed as A-Class by other projects like WP:MILHIST are automatically eligible. Battle of Marathon (as of November 2010)
GA
{{GA-Class}}
Reserved for articles that meet the good article criteria and have received good article status. Good article nominations Battle of Bathys Ryax (as of November 2010)
B
{{B-Class}}
The article meets the following five criteria:
  1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited.
  2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.
  3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
  4. It is free from major grammatical errors.
  5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.
May be assigned by any reviewer. The B-class checklist is available through {{WPGR}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details); if not all criteria are met, the article is automatically assessed as C-class. Alexander the Great (as of November 2010)
C
{{C-Class}}
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. May be assigned by any reviewer. In practice, C-class should be reserved for articles that fulfill at least three of the B-class criteria, including at least one of #1 (references) and #2 (coverage). The B-class checklist is available through {{WPGR}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details). Antiochus III the Great (as of November 2010)
Start
{{Start-Class}}
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element; it has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:
  • A particularly useful picture or graphic
  • Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
May be assigned by any reviewer Aetolian League (as of November 2010)
Stub
{{Stub-Class}}
The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. May be assigned by any reviewer Acronauplia (as of November 2010)

Importance scheme[edit]

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field. Greece and the "X of Greece" articles (such as History of Greece).
High Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular context. History of Crete
Mid Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. Muslim minority of Greece
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. In summary, pretty much everything else. Galatsi
NA Non-articles, templates, categories, redirects, etc. {{WPGR}}


Requests for 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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the peer review department instead.

  1. Antiparos Article was last assessed in 2007 and has been greatly expanded since then. Requesting reassessment. PaintedCarpet (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
  2. Turkish invasion of Cyprus - This article has three different classifications by five different projects, attempting to gain some consesnsus on class. Thanks, SalopianJames (talk) 12:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
  3. Hellenic Parliament - Be gentle. panionios1890 (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2013 (EET)
  4. Cyan (trance band) - article created by me today. Please assess the Categories, and/or add missing Categories to Talk page and assess those too. Also, where can I ask for help on expanding the article? Maybe a Greek editor can add much more info than I can. Naki (talk) 12:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)