Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Assessment

Main pageAssessmentHelpParticipantsCoordinatorsSpotlightOutreachResourcesPortalRecognized content

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Film! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Film 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 Film}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Film articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questions

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 Film 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

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Film}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.

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

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

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class film articles)		Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class film articles)		Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class film articles)		Draft
FM (for featured media only; adds pages to Category:FM-Class film articles)		FM
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class film articles)		File
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class film articles)		Portal
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class film articles)		Project
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class film articles)		Redirect
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class film articles)		Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class film articles)		NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed film articles)		???

Core articles

In lieu of a moribund importance rating, the project has deprecated the importance parameter in favor of a targeted drive towards "core"-type articles as determined by consensus in external lists and polls rather than individual editorial whim. This work is concentrated at the Core department of this WikiProject.

Film grading scheme

WikiProject Film article progress grading scheme

Class	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA	The article has attained featured article status. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured article criteria: A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes. It is: well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard; comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate; neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of: a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.	Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.	The Dark Knight (as of January 2023)
GA	The article has attained good article status. More detailed criteria The article meets the good article criteria: A good article is: Well-written: the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); it contains no original research; and it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia.	Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.	Enola Holmes (film) (as of December 2022)
B	The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria The article meets the five B-Class criteria: The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for a good article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.	Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.	A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines.	Julieta (film) (as of July 2016)
C	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. More detailed criteria The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.	Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.	Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues.	Joy (film) (as of July 2016)
Start	An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria The article has a usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas, usually in referencing. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide enough sources to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.	Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more.	Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation.	Life Partners (as of July 2016)
Stub	A very basic description of the topic. More detailed criteria The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short, but if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category.	Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority.	The Star (2002 film) (as of July 2016)
FL	The article has attained featured list status. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured list criteria: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations. (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly. (c) Accessibility. It uses proper formating to be accessible to all readers. Bulleted and unbulleted lists and tables are structured correctly. Visual media, if included, utilize alternative (alt) text. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.	Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available.	List of highest-grossing films (as of January 2023)
List	Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area.	There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader.	Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized.	List of 2015 box office number-one films in the United States (as of July 2016)
SIA	Meets the criteria of a set index article, which is a list article about a set of items of a specific type that share the same (or similar) name. A set index article is not a disambiguation page.	Meant for information as well as navigation; should have a clear layout which is easy to follow.	A set index article should follow the same style guidelines for a stand-alone list, and can be tagged with {{set index article}}.	Film adaptations of Crime and Punishment (as of November 2015)

Requests for assessment

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. (Note that this is not required; any editor may assess or re-assess an article on their own, if acting in good faith.)

If you assess an article, please strike it off so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Comments are not mandatory and any should be left at the article's talk page; the list below will be wiped periodically.

If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please list it for peer review instead.

New requests

• Love, Love, My Love – assessment against B-class criteria. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 01:37, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
• Radical Harmonies, Edie & Thea: A Very Long Engagement and International Sweethearts of Rhythm (film) – I added these new articles recently and supplied a class=Start value on each talk page. But I wonder if any might qualify for a higher assessment? Thanks. NOLA1982 (talk) 21:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC); updated NOLA1982 (talk) 16:21, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
• Ashes and Diamonds (film) – The article has been recently expanded but still holds the Start-class rating. Maybe it deserves a re-assessment. Ironupiwada (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Someone went ahead and tagged it as a Good Article,[1] although it doesn't seem to have gone through GA Review. It is good quality though, it would seem to be B Class at least. -- 109.79.83.56 (talk) 11:29, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
• DaVinci Resolve - Requesting re-assessment, following significant expansion compared to original article. User:IAmTheNeil
• Cinematic style of Christopher Nolan - listing on the author's behalf. lovkal (talk) 09:25, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
• Love Crazy (1941 film) - Rated as stub-class when created, but since then has been greatly improved. Old Man Consequences (talk) 22:00, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
• Australian Film Commission
• Buenos Aires International Festival of Independent Cinema
• Mar del Plata International Film Festival
• Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (film) – assessment against B-class criteria. El Millo (talk) 06:00, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
• The Edge of Democracy, currently "class=Start". X1\ (talk) 01:08, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
• Hoaxed Eternal Father (talk) 20:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
• The Unknown Known - Probably not a start class article anymore, but I am the main author so would like outside opinion. Thank you! I enjoy sandwiches (talk) 22:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
• The Putin Interviews - Article was expanded. Move to start class? — Preceding unsigned comment added by P,TO 19104 (talk • contribs) 17:29, May 28, 2020) (UTC)
• List of Bollywood movies released on Digital Platform (list) - Anuxps (talk) 21:29, 2 July 2020 (UTC) I have requested to add a List and here is the draft link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:List_of_Bollywood_Movies_Released_on_Digital_Platform of the article. Reviewer AngusWoof is asking to discuss over here about do we need this topic at all. Here is a link of the conversation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AngusWOOF#Draft%3A_List_of_Bollywood_Movies_Released_on_Digital_Platform I am trying to make a consolidate list of Bollywood movies which are release on different digital platform. There are various digital platform who are releasing the movies on their platform and end user is not having a consolidated list and not aware about on which platform movie would be available, when it would be available. My list will provide a consolidated information. The list like Hotstar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hotstar_original_programming) mentioned is specifically made for one of the digital platform hoststar but there are so many other platform available and no consolidated list is here. Kindly please approve the request so that I will contribute more on to the page. I will definitely enhance this page more once it got approved otherwise no point to put effort to draft so much content and ultimately it will not approve.

• The Blip - assessment against B/C class criteria following considerable expansion by BD2412. IronManCap (talk) 18:19, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• America 3000: I'm a student editor and selected this page as my main project. I've made extensive revisions to the article. Prior to my work the article was considered a Stub. I believe it is now at minimum a 'start', if not 'C Class' criteria. WillKBeatty (talk) 17:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
  • C-class indeed. Your work is appreciated. — Bilorv (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
• LuckyChap Entertainment I have added a considerable amount of information to this article, creating new sections and adding important detailed information, backed up with plenty of citations, so I don't think it should be rated as a stub class article anymore... Thanks! --Tasrockstar (talk) 01:13, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Answered at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Assessment#2021. — Bilorv (talk) 23:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
• The Waiting City - Hello! I've added various new sections to this stub article and would love if someone could take a look at it to revise its assessment rating. When I first started editing, it was a Stub-class article but I believe it could now be classified under a new assessment rating. I have added new sections and included many citations throughout it as well. I would greatly appreciate any feedback on the article's talk page too. Thank you! Kaexkae (talk) 12:01, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
• Inauguration of the CommonwealthHello! I've made considerable edits to this page and believe it at minimum meets a start class criteria. Cheers! Deathbydecaf (talk) 02:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
• Made in China (2009 film) Hi, I'm a uni student that is expanding on this article for a class. It is currently considered a stub and I would greatly appreciate a rating assessment or just any feedback regarding my edits. Thank you! Dirkymumu (talk) 14:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
• Herostratus (film) The article is currently listed as a stub class article and the original article had very little information as the film is quite old. I have updated it with significantly more sources and information regarding the film's production, reception, and the themes. Any review or advice for improving it further would be appreciated, but as is I think it should be beyond a stub class article. DoingItForTheCredit (talk) 14:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
• The King (2017 American film) Hi there- my article has been rated as a 'C class' article but is currently under review for 'B Class' status. I was wondering if someone could please review it for me. Thank you so much! Husseyp (talk) 06:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
• Ghost Messenger has been edited a lot past two years and is ready for reassessment. Ppg409 (talk) 5:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
• Oyster Farmer appears to be suitable for upgrading from a stub.Michaelwallace22 (talk) 00:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
• Roadrunner: A Film About Anthony Bourdain - I expanded the article a bit; it's currently ranked at Start-class, but I believe it could be C-class. Isi96 (talk) 04:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Isi96: I've left this at start-class because of the lack of sufficient summary and the massive coverage imbalance. It reads more like a "Controversy of Roadrunner" article but missing enough detail in the background of the film even for that focus. Kingsif (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• The Night (2020 film) - I expanded this article with a plot summary and some reviews; it's currently at Stub-class. Isi96 (talk) 14:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Isi96: Assessed at C-class, but the plot is too long, it's nearly 1000 words at the moment. It's also a sandwiched article: plot and reviews present, but nothing substantial in-between. Kingsif (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• The Vigil (2019 film) - I expanded this article with a plot summary; it's currently at Start-class. Isi96 (talk) 14:25, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Isi96: A more solid C-class, needs production details. Kingsif (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• Moulin Rouge! - Currently at C-class. I made extensive revisions and expanded the article with the "Analysis" section. Please assess against B-Class criteria. Thanks! Msoul13 (talk) 14:23, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
• Saekano the Movie: Finale - Expanded the said movie article. Currently at "Start" rating, and I would like to know if it can get a new rating. Thank you! Centcom08 (talk) 10:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
• Magnolia Pictures appears to be suitable for upgrading from a stub.Michaelwallace22 (talk) 7:43, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
• Back to the Future soundtracks, currently at Start-class, but I have added significantly more content since. Theknine2 (talk) 16:14, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
• A Certain Magical Index: The Movie – The Miracle of Endymion - Expanded this movie. Can it get a new rating from its current "Start"? Centcom08 (talk) 17:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
• Shershaah, currently listed as Start Class. The article is a magnet for disruption and vandalism these days; I am listing it as of this permalink 2405:201:4013:80F1:8C80:A00F:E9B2:6937 (talk) 00:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Statistics

Current status

Overall project

Film pages by quality
Quality
	Total
FA	189
FL	481
FM	33
A	1
GA	1,426
B	1,471
C	10,483
Start	71,329
Stub	96,491
List	13,181
Category	54,470
Disambig	372
File	110,814
Portal	19
Project	229
Redirect	11,707
Template	9,507
NA	35
Assessed	382,238
Unassessed	15
Total	382,253
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 984,789			Ω = 5.43

Statistics by task force

Film articles by task forces
Quality	American cinema	Argentine cinema	Australian cinema	Baltic cinema	Belgian cinema	British cinema	Canadian cinema	Chinese cinema	Christian films	Comic book films	Core list	Film awards	Film festivals	Filmmaking
FA	117	1	3	0	0	26	9	3	2	5	22	0	0	2
A	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
GA	921	3	25	0	0	174	59	15	5	96	68	8	1	18
B	857	4	42	1	0	155	60	15	13	84	60	7	8	79
C	4,972	44	265	12	0	896	379	158	57	287	231	64	106	460
Start	25,990	323	1,497	71	0	5,247	2,306	1,814	265	637	146	581	824	2,075
Stub	30,022	1,237	1,765	179	0	6,235	3,621	1,918	156	175	3	488	705	1,834
FL	220	1	3	1	0	40	6	1	0	14	0	256	1	0
List	3,002	117	254	19	0	550	442	372	5	72	0	5,900	678	141
Category	5,671	78	650	73	0	1,394	483	332	105	333	0	795	441	15,059
Disambig	28	0	1	0	0	2	1	1	0	3	0	8	0	3
File	605	0	3	0	0	54	11	13	4	216	0	17	3	8
Portal	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Redirect	2,321	159	72	2	0	362	114	28	32	351	0	602	52	375
Template	637	50	0	12	0	135	73	106	5	56	0	701	46	181
NA	18	1	1	0	0	2	1	0	1	2	3	3	3	7
Unassessed	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0
Total	75,620	2,018	4,614	371	−3	15,277	7,570	4,772	652	2,395	533	9,434	2,873	20,264
Quality	Belgian cinema	French cinema	German cinema	Indian cinema	Italian cinema	Japanese cinema	Korean cinema	New Zealand cinema	Nordic cinema	Persian cinema	Southeast Asian cinema	Soviet and post-Soviet cinema	Spanish cinema	War films
FA	0	5	5	31	3	5	0	1	0	0	21	1	0	8
A	0	0	0	6	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
GA	0	47	40	200	32	62	4	15	18	0	31	8	7	48
B	0	58	39	174	23	68	9	18	17	3	19	12	12	85
C	0	368	227	1,725	187	392	97	52	134	19	176	73	236	858
Start	0	2,501	1,410	14,699	1,469	2,103	934	187	830	183	1,657	930	1,077	2,291
Stub	0	5,737	5,625	10,073	5,343	2,049	768	185	2,690	379	1,280	1,959	1,374	1,414
FL	0	5	1	112	2	5	3	0	0	0	9	0	1	3
List	0	389	174	2,134	271	253	248	27	228	23	339	220	193	54
Category	0	640	388	1,150	434	676	158	107	706	67	601	402	209	593
Disambig	0	1	2	76	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	3
File	0	32	20	152	13	64	8	4	10	5	3	14	2	11
Portal	0	0	0	53	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Redirect	0	116	40	978	68	262	24	10	50	9	40	23	24	36
Template	0	348	163	397	82	100	36	4	135	30	82	60	74	26
NA	0	3	0	6	1	1	0	0	0	1	2	0	1	4
Unassessed	0	2	0	5	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	−3	10,253	8,135	30,368	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3

Assessment log

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); 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/Film articles by quality log