Wikipedia:WikiProject Libraries/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Libraries
WikiProject Libraries
Main / talk
Introduction
Main / talk
Members
Main / talk
Resources
Main / talk
Writing guide
Main / talk
Assessment
Main / talk
Cleanup listing
Main / talk

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Libraries. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Libraries related 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:Libraries 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 Libraries}} project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the {{WikiProject Libraries}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Libraries articles by quality.

The following system is based on the general criteria for assessing how close we are to a distribution-quality article on a particular topic. The system is based on a letter scheme which reflects principally how complete the article is, though the content and language quality are also factors. Once an article reaches the A-Class, it is considered "complete", although edits will continue to be made.

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 Libraries 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 on how to assess a WikiProject Libraries article[edit]

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

WikiProject Libraries articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{WikiProject Libraries}} template on their talk page, but the template may be incomplete. Select an article from the list at Category:Unassessed Libraries articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{WikiProject Libraries}} 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 Libraries articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Two levels, GA and FA, are not assessments that can be assigned simply by a project member. These refer to external judgments of article quality made at WP:GA and WP:FA. If these tags are desired, and the article meets the criteria (for GA or FA), it must be nominated (for GA or FA) and await comments.

It is vital that people do not take these assessments personally. It is understood that we all have different priorities and different opinions about what makes a perfect article. Generally an active project will develop a consensus, though be aware that different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area, such as this. Many projects have an assessment team. If you contribute a lot of content to an article you may request an independent assessment.

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Requesting an assessment[edit]

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for it, please feel free to list it below. Note: This is only to rate the article on quality - you may or may not get feedback on the article. If you desire a review, use the Assessment page to request one. If you assess an article, please remove it so that other editors will not waste time reviewing the same articles. 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. Charles Theodore Hagberg Wright - new article on the chief of London Library. I don't have access to the books on the subject (listed in "further reading") so the article is a patchwork of lines pulled from various online sources. Perhaps a DYK suggestion? I thought of something like ".. that a renowned librarian raised money for an escape of a convicted terrorist" but it sounds too cheap. And it was 1908, not 2010, and it appears to be an act of compassion rather than politics. East of Borschov (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
  2. Mary Willis Library - New article that has not been assessed. Thanks! - TampAGS (talk) 21:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
  3. Public Libraries Act 1850 - expanded from stub to full article, --Group 10 librarians (talk) 09:43, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
  4. John Davis Barnett -- new article on JD Barnett. Canadian librarian of note that should be added to the portal. CJ_WeißSchäfer 13:13, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
  5. Greenstone (software) - 23 November 2010. Have added references to reliable third party publications and removed undocumented claims.
  6. Bishopsgate Library - needs re-editing, see Talk page.--Lidos (talk) 09:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
  7. SafetyLit Please reassess article. It has been greatly expanded from when it was rated stub. Comments are welcome. David Lawrence, Ph.D.; San Diego State University 19:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
  8. GLBT Historical Society. Substantially expanded and restructured since initial rating. Please reassess.
  9. Special libraries. Expanded and re-formatted to allow for future growth. Suggestions for more growth made on discussion page. Murasaki.suki (talk) 23:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
  10. Library Review (journal) - have completely revised whole page, added new titles and added citations, 1001becca (talk) 14:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
  11. Berlin State Library - finished a complete rewrite, greatly expanded history section, added new information for a balanced point of view, wikified format, added infobox, reordered sections and titles. Updated statistics from sources and added inline citations. Ultracobalt (talk) 04:32, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
  12. Saratoga Springs Public Library Listroiderbob (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
  13. Maughan Library - Significantly expanded. Feedback is appreciated! Trillig (talk) 05:35, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
  14. Trends in library usage - Moved and significantly edited with over 30 new citations added. Libraryowl (talk) 19:21, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
  15. Information Professional - Added a lot of new content, references, global information. MargRouk (talk) 13:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
  16. National archives- new. About the concept of a national archive rather than any one archive particularly. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:25, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Current Status[edit]

Featured article FA  A-Class article A   GA  B-Class article B  C-Class article C  Start-Class article Start  Stub-Class article Stub  Featured list FL   List  Category page Category  Disambiguation page Disambig   File   Portal   Project   Template   NA   ???  Total
2 0 31 116 220 2,363 1,994 4 388 926 8 32 1 12 27 34 5 6,163
WikiProject Libraries  articles by quality     Refresh

Assessment log[edit]

The logs in this section are generated automatically; 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/Libraries articles by quality log

Importance Rating[edit]

WikiProject article importance scheme