Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera/Assessment

Quality scale

Important note, 2 June 2008

As preparation for a scheme of article assessment by Project members, most articles with the Project banner on their Talk pages have been automatically given an Opera Project rating of

• FA, FL, GA, as appropriate, if the article has been awarded one of those statuses,
• Stub, if the article has a Stub template, or
• Start, if the article does not fall into any of the above categories. This is a provisional rating pending implementation of the assessment exercise

Some articles awarded Start have been manually upgraded to B where "Start" is manifestly inappropriate.

Article progress grading scheme

Label	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editor's experience	Examples
FA {{FA-Class}}	Articles that have received "Featured article" status after peer review, meeting current criteria.	Definitive. Excellent, thorough article; a great source of information.	No further editing necessary, unless new published information has come to light.	Dmitri Shostakovich
FL {{FL-Class}}	Lists that have received "Featured lists" status after peer review, meeting current criteria.	Definitive. Meticulous. A great source.	No further editing necessary, unless new published information has come to light.	List of major opera composers, List of operas by Mozart
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 the "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, preferably with free media rather than fair use ones, which are only to be used as a last resort. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. Scholarly analysis of the topic is aptly summarised. Inline citations are essential.	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points.	Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage.	French opera, Porgy and Bess
GA {{GA-Class}}	The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise good. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but being a Good article is not a requirement for A-Class.	Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, excessive information. Adequate for most purposes, but other encyclopedias could do a better job.	Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time.	Agrippina, Dido and Aeneas, Venus and Adonis, The Fairy-Queen, Orfeo ed Euridice, Parsifal
B {{B-Class}}	Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a completed article. Such articles should be neutral and devoid of original research. If free images are used, this is a bonus. B-class articles on operas should contain a full plot synopsis, a decent level of contextual analysis including relation to other works of the same period, and a full roles table containing the names of original performers, where available. The articles is referenced to reliable sources (such as Grove), possibly using inline citations. See also B-class criteria.	Useful to many, but not all, readers.	Expansion is still needed, usually scholarly analysis being the lacking element.	Tristan und Isolde
C {{C-Class}}	The article has a lot of good content and is not missing any key elements entirely. However, it will most likely have multiple sections that are overly brief or incomplete, the prose may be unclear or poorly worded in places, or the article may contain few or no references. The article may also have issues with original research or neutrality and balance.	Useful to some readers. A casual reader with little prior knowledge of the topic would gain some knowledge of major aspects of the topic, but the article might not give in-depth information in certain areas. Detailed or serious research will require use of other sources.	Significant editing is still needed to close gaps in coverage or correct policy errors. Some parts may need to be substantially reworded, and editors will need to find more references for many existing sections.	La bohème, Nell Rankin
Start {{Start-Class}}	Start-Class articles on operas should contain a decent level of contextual information (including a modicum of criticism), a table of roles (though not necessarily with names of original performers), and will have a moderately detailed plot synopsis. An excess of one of these elements makes up for a lack in another.	The article could contain more information, but most will find it moderately useful.	Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added.	La Cenerentola, La gazza ladra
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. Stub-class articles on operas will probably contain minimal contextual information, such as date and place of first performance, and may either give a brief plot summary or a list of roles.	Minimally useful. Provides a basic introduction.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful.	Baldassare Ferri, Aucassin et Nicolette
List {{List-Class}}	Any list that has not received "Featured lists" status after peer review.			List of opera festivals
Needed {{Needed-Class}}	The article does not exist and needs to be created.			See The opera corpus for red-link opera titles.

Importance scale

As of 24 June 2008, the project has decided not to implement an importance scale. This decision may be reconsidered in June 2009 or later.

Points system for articles

Operas

Elements	Points
Background/history of composition/discussion of plot and/or text, etc.	15
Performance history, including recent performance history and creators of roles (the latter will normally appear in the Roles table)	15
Tabulated list of roles	05
Synopsis	10
Notable arias, etc: (preferably embedded in the synopsis)	05
Critical appreciation, discussion of music etc	15
Recordings	10
Illustrations, including musical illustrations	10
Inline references, notes, sources, external links	15

Opera singers

Elements	Points
Family background/studies	05
Early career and significant breakthroughs	10
Mature career including major debuts	20
List of roles (if available - with dates when possible)	10
Critical appreciation (with full sources)	15
Complete discography	10
Bibliography (if any)	05
Illustrations	10
Inline references, notes, sources, internal and external sources	15

Opera directors

Elements	Points
Family background/studies	05
Early career and assistant director jobs	10
Mature career, including full coverage of work outside opera	20
List of productions (if available - with dates when possible)	10
Critical appreciation (with full sources)	15
Complete videography	10
Bibliography (if any)	05
Illustrations	10
Inline references, notes, sources, internal and external sources	15

The points for each element are the most that can be allocated. Elements that are present but brief or incomplete would attract part-scores. The maximum total points for any article would thus be 100.

Points translated into classifications

Scores are translated into the standard WP classification, as follows:

• 0-24: Stub
• 25-49: Start
• 50-74: C
• 75-89: B
• 90+: A

(Note that GA and FA classes are assessed and awarded independently, so do not figure in the above).

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team count

Opera pages by quality
Quality
	Total
FA	40
FL	3
GA	56
B	477
C	1,313
Start	7,977
Stub	3,282
List	242
Category	2,593
Disambig	9
File	161
Portal	265
Project	258
Template	340
NA	188
Assessed	17,204
Unassessed	57
Total	17,261
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 66,372			Ω = 5.05

Please note that updates to this table are often delayed by several days.