Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Mammals! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Mammals 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 recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{MaTalk}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Mammal articles by quality and Category:Mammal articles by importance, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{MaTalk}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
How can I get my article rated? 
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles? 
Any member of the Mammals WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Please add your name to the list of participants if you wish to assess articles on a regular basis!
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.
Where can I get more comments about my article? 
The Status requester can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
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 (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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 can I keep track of changes in article ratings? 
A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the statistics may be more accessible.

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

Instructions[edit]

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{MaTalk}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{MaTalk| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

Any article which does not have an importance parameter assigned is automatically placed in the Category:Unknown-importance mammal articles. 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 importance scale below.

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Importance scale[edit]

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.

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.

Status Template Meaning of Status
Top {{Top-Class}} This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information.
High {{High-Class}} This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.
Mid {{Mid-Class}} This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Low {{Low-Class}} This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.
None None This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed.

Importance standards[edit]

To be filled later

Requesting an 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.

Participants[edit]

Please feel free to add your name to this list if you would like to join the assessment team

  1. Questions?answers!(X) (talk · contribs) -->Bears
  2. Warlordjohncarter (talk · contribs)
  3. BlindEagletalk~contribs 19:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
  4. Innotata (talk · contribs)
  5. ZooPro (talk · contribs)

Example assessments[edit]

To assess an article, place {{MaTalk|class=|importance=}} onto the article's talk page.

Statistics[edit]

Log[edit]

The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available here. Unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.