Wikipedia:WikiProject Neopaganism/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Main page (Talk) Assessment (Talk) To-Do (Talk) References (Talk) Resources (Talk) Members (Talk)

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

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

Contents

Frequently asked questions[edit]

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 Neopaganism WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
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.
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[edit]

Assessing articles[edit]

Quality[edit]

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

{{WikiProject Neopaganism|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 Neopaganism articles) Featured article FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Neopaganism articles) A-Class article A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Neopaganism articles)  GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Neopaganism articles) B-Class article B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Neopaganism articles) C-Class article C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Neopaganism articles) Start-Class article Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Neopaganism articles) Stub-Class article Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Neopaganism articles) Featured list FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Neopaganism 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 Neopaganism articles) Category page Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Neopaganism articles) Disambiguation page Disambig 
File (for files; adds pages to Category:File-Class Neopaganism articles)  File 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Neopaganism articles)  Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Neopaganism articles)  Project 
Template (for templates; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Neopaganism articles)  Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Neopaganism articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Neopaganism articles)  ??? 

Importance[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Neopaganism}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Neopaganism|importance=???}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project:

Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Neopaganism articles)  Top 
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Neopaganism articles)  High 
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Neopaganism articles)  Mid 
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Neopaganism articles)  Low 
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Neopaganism articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Neopaganism articles  ??? 

The importance parameter should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Discussion[edit]

After assessing an article, comments on the assessment can be added either to the article's talk page or to the /Comments subpage which will appear as a link next to the assessment. Adding comments will add the article to Category:Neopaganism articles with comments. Comments that are added to the /Comments subpages will be transcluded onto the automatically generated work list pages in the Comments column.

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Importance scale[edit]

Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Top The article is one of the core topics about Neopaganism. A reader who is not involved in the field of Neopaganism will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily. Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages. Neopaganism
High The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding Neopaganism.
Mid The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in the history of Neopaganism. Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject. Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand religion, such as specific aspects of Neopaganism. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text. Most people involved in Neopaganism will be rated in this level.
Low The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of Neopaganism. Few readers outside the Neopaganism field may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article. Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of Neopaganism, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed. Topics included at this level include most practices and infrastructure of Neopaganism.

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.

  1. Gardnerian Wicca -- I have added an image, re-ordered the content and extended the introduction to give the article some structure. Have added some citations and will add more in due course. This important article is rated as 'Start' now, but I would like to bring it up to B Class. It would be helpful if someone could independently assess what further changes are needed? Kim dent brown 11:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Philip Heselton -- I have made some additions here and would welcome a POV check as I am a close friend of his and may not have been as objective as I would wish. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk to me) 22:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  3. PODSnet, I've substantially rewritten and added to this article; I don't think that a lot of people realize how important to the development and spread of neopaganism in the US PODSNet was. The article can be expanded further, but I'm starting to hit the original research/NPOV barriers, as I was a PODSNet SysOp back in the day. I'd appreciate a different set of eyes to look it over. Thanks. HR Mitchell 21:51, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
  4. Paganism in South Africa is a new article I created which I have expanded to the best of my ability. I would appreciate an objective assessment. Thanks! HelenOnline (talk) 09:04, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Assessment log[edit]

Neopaganism articles:
Index · Statistics · Log
The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

October 12, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 5, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 3, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 27, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Rockbitch (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

September 13, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

September 12, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

September 11, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 23, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

August 19, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

August 18, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 17, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

August 7, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 5, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

July 23, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 22, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Odalism (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to NA-Class (rev · t).

July 15, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

July 11, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 7, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

June 30, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 28, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

June 24, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

June 23, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

June 21, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Awen (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t).

June 10, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

June 9, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Wiccaning (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Mid-Class (rev · t).

June 3, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Wicca (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from GA-Class to B-Class (rev · t).

June 1, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 23, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Brujería (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

May 22, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

May 21, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 20, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 19, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 24, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 10, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

April 4, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

April 2, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 1, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

March 31, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Odalism (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class (rev · t).

March 29, 2014[edit]

Removed[edit]

March 26, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

March 13, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

March 10, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

February 27, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

February 26, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

February 14, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Paganism (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Top-Class (rev · t).

January 19, 2014[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

January 16, 2014[edit]

Assessed[edit]

January 13, 2014[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

December 30, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 29, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Pagan rock (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

December 27, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Cathbad (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).
  • Mug Ruith (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).
  • Semik (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).

December 24, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 19, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

December 15, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 14, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 13, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 8, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Semik (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to NA-Class (rev · t).
  • Taillten Fair (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to NA-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Low-Class to NA-Class (rev · t).

December 7, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 6, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

December 5, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

December 2, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

November 30, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

November 26, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

November 21, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

November 16, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

November 14, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Freya Aswynn (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to NA-Class (rev · t).

Assessed[edit]

November 13, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

November 8, 2013[edit]

Removed[edit]

November 6, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

November 4, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

November 2, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 26, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 22, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 21, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 14, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Halloween (talk) reassessed. Quality assessed as B-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class (rev · t).

October 13, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

October 3, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

October 3, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

October 3, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

October 1, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 30, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

September 25, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 22, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

September 21, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Flying ointment (talk) reassessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

Assessed[edit]

September 18, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 14, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

September 12, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

September 8, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 6, 2013[edit]

Removed[edit]

September 5, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 3, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

September 1, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 23, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 21, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

August 17, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Prose Edda (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t).

August 15, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 14, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 10, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • William Stukeley (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Mid-Class to Unknown-Class (rev · t).

August 7, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

August 2, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 26, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 25, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Magic word (talk) reassessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).
  • Spell (paranormal) (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

July 21, 2013[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 17, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 14, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Hoar Stone (talk) reassessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to NA-Class (rev · t).

July 13, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Lyneham Longbarrow (talk) reassessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

Assessed[edit]

July 11, 2013[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

  • Hill of Skulls (talk) reassessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

July 3, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

July 2, 2013[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Assessed[edit]