Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment: Difference between revisions
small correction |
|||
Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
<!-- PLACE NEW REQUESTS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS LIST --> |
<!-- PLACE NEW REQUESTS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS LIST --> |
||
Edit this section and place request here |
|||
# [[Sukhdev Singh Babbar]] Needs re-assessment - This article has been significantly improved since initial assessment. References have been provided from several continents/countries/United Nations etc. Structure, content, and references all look reasonably solid and appear to deserve well above Stub-class based on the guidelines.--[[User:Singh6|Singh6]] ([[User talk:Singh6|talk]]) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC) |
# [[Sukhdev Singh Babbar]] Needs re-assessment - This article has been significantly improved since initial assessment. References have been provided from several continents/countries/United Nations etc. Structure, content, and references all look reasonably solid and appear to deserve well above Stub-class based on the guidelines.--[[User:Singh6|Singh6]] ([[User talk:Singh6|talk]]) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
# [[Gurdev Singh Debu]] Needs assessment.--[[User:Singh6|Singh6]] ([[User talk:Singh6|talk]]) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC) |
# [[Gurdev Singh Debu]] Needs assessment.--[[User:Singh6|Singh6]] ([[User talk:Singh6|talk]]) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:36, 18 November 2008
Welcome to the assessment department of the Biography WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Biography 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:Biography articles by quality serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPBiography}} project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Biography articles by quality.
Frequently asked questions
- 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 Biography 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!
- How may I begin assessing articles?
- Assessment may be done through a variety of ways, but the most efficient is through use of the MetaData article assessment script.
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.go to home page
Instructions on how to assess a Biography article
An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPBiography}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed biography articles. At present, there are over 50,000 biography articles that need assessment (e.g., that need to have a class inserted in the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template).
Biography articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{WPBiography}} template on their talk page, but the template may be incomplete. First, give yourself access to the MetaData article assessment script by following the instructions at MetaData. Next, select an article from the list at Category:Unassessed biography articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{WPBiography}} template. Finally, select the appropriate answers for the MetaData script. You will be brought to the talk page where you may complete the assessment.
Class parameter
The following values may be used for the class parameter:
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class biography articles)
- FL (adds articles to Category:FL-Class biography articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class biography articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class biography articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class biography articles)
- C (adds articles to Category:C-Class biography articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class biography articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class biography articles)
- List (adds articles to Category:List-Class biography articles)
- NA (for pages, such as redirects, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:WikiProject Biography non-article pages)
- Dab (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on disambiguation pages)
- Template (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on template pages; see example)
- Cat (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on category pages)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed biography articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
Priority parameter
The following values may be used for the priority parameter:
- Top
- High
- Mid
- Low
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 priority scale below. Note that the priority is used on the workgroup lists only.
Core parameter
The template also has a core=yes parameter for core articles only, as selected by the Core Biographies team.
Quality scale
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|
FA | The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. 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.
|
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. | Cleopatra (as of June 2018) |
FL | The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
|
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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
A | The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria
The article meets the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history). |
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help. | Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014) |
GA | The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria
A good article is:
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. | 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. | Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019) |
B | The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria
|
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. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. | Psychology (as of January 2024) |
C | The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
|
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 solve cleanup problems. | Wing (as of June 2018) |
Start | An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
|
Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. | Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. | Ball (as of September 2014) |
Stub | A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. | Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant. | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. | Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014) |
List | Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, 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 literary movements |
Priority scale
Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If priority values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the biography falls under. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority 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).
Label | Criteria | Examples |
---|---|---|
Top | High probability that non-Historians would look this up. Limited to the top 200 biographies. Must have had a large impact outside of their main discipline, across several generations, and in the majority of the world. For instance, Einstein, brilliant physicist, but his theories have affected people outside of physics and in many other countries besides his nation of origin and several generations. His ideas have changed the way people think. No member should give this rating to any biography without first getting Project approval from the other members. | Albert Einstein |
High | Must have had a large impact in their main discipline, across a couple of generations. Had some impact outside their country of origin. | Patrick Henry |
Mid | Important in their discipline. | John Seigenthaler, Sr. |
Low | Subject is notable in their main discipline. | Morena Baccarin |
Requesting an assessment
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 peer review process. If you assess an article, please remove it so that other editors will not waste time reviewing the same articles. Thanks!
Seeking an A-class rating? Go to the A-class review department and follow the instructions on that page. You might first want to submit it for a Peer Review to allow us more time to respond and review.
Articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B', unless they are already rated as 'GA' by Wikipedia:Good articles/Candidates.
Edit this section and place request here
- Sukhdev Singh Babbar Needs re-assessment - This article has been significantly improved since initial assessment. References have been provided from several continents/countries/United Nations etc. Structure, content, and references all look reasonably solid and appear to deserve well above Stub-class based on the guidelines.--Singh6 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Gurdev Singh Debu Needs assessment.--Singh6 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Manbir Singh Chaheru Needs assessment.--Singh6 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Harjinder Singh Jinda Needs assessment.--Singh6 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sukhdev Singh Sukha Needs assessment.--Singh6 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Kenneth G. Mills has been significantly edited since initial assessment. Structure, content, and references all look reasonably solid and appear to deserve well above Stub-class based on the guidelines.
- Pin Malakul - New article --Paul_012 (talk) 14:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
- Frank País - has been expanded since last assessment. Copana2002 (talk) 19:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Samuel Bowles (journalist) has been extensively rewritten and citations have been added--I believe it should be rated above Start-class. Wesrobking (talk) 23:16, 16 October 2008
- Theodore Lukens - New article, my first attempt at a bio-thank you in advance for your time. Marcia Wright (talk) 03:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Swami Nikhilananda - rewrote the stub with refs. I think a assessment is required. Thanks. — Nvineeth talk 12:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- John Pitcairn, Jr. - New article --wormcast (talk) 14:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Herbert Distel - Thanks in advance for rating this biographic article of mine. Tellus archivist (talk) 20:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Joe Cocker - Rated as Start Class in the WP Biography box, but rated B class in the WikiProject Sheffield box. Oldiesmann (talk) 21:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Linda Ketner -Unrated--Robert Waalk (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Paul Citroen - I think this is more than a Stub-class. SpecialK(KoЯn flakes) 08:39, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- Jim Nussle - B rating, but (was) completely lacking references. Possible edits by subject should be checked for quality. Louis Waweru Talk 17:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
- Orfeh - Last rated as a stub, has been expanded since. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennamaroney (talk • contribs) 05:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- Kim Ji-hoo -- expanded from short stub. PC78 (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sierra Swan -- expanded & reorganized from stub. Not 100% complete, but at least 80% complete... 22:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- Shania Twain - reassessment; hundreds of changes and more references since Start-class assessment. Dan56 (talk) 14:47, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Lenny Montana -- I expanded on the original stub article by adding a picture, references and adding expanded information on his wrestling and acting carrear. I think it should be upgraded from a Stub Class. Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveTyla15 (talk • contribs) 07:30, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
- Maud Chaworth- Pretty much a rewrite of the whole article. Expanded on life and family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaudChaworthGroupies (talk • contribs) 23:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
- Jamie Graham -- expanded, referenced and edited since start-class assessment in June 2007 Stevecudmore (talk) 16:53, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- The Get Up Kids - Previously a stub rating, the article has been vastly expanded, cleaned up and generally improved since the rating. Rwiggum (Talk/Contrib) 22:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sir Ewan Forbes, 11th Baronet - expanded & fully sourced. Short an image, but can't have everything. Shimgray | talk | 11:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ranulf le Meschin, 3rd Earl of Chester, unrated. Punkmorten (talk) 09:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Dorothy Dietrich - Previously a stub rating, the article has been vastly expanded, cleaned up and generally improved with many added references since the rating. Magicusb (talk) 17:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Former Arkansas State Treasurer and Auditor Gus Wingfield I don't think this has been rated since I made the article. I have since made major changes this year.--Robert Waalk (talk) 02:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Current Arkansas State Auditor Jim Wood I've never got an official assessment for this one. The one on the talk page is just an infobox I inserted from another page. Recently created.--Robert Waalk (talk) 02:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Same thing with longtime state auditor James Herbert Jones. Recently created.--Robert Waalk (talk) 02:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Same issue with Jimmie Lou Fisher's article, though I've also made a lot of changes recently.--Robert Waalk (talk) 02:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
- Emmy Rossum: I'm requesting a reassessment of the article. I meant to do this a while back, but never got around to it. The article is currently rated as Start-Class, even though it appears to be above that now. -- Luke4545 (talk) 04:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
- Robert MacLean: I would like to please have an assessment on this biography. Thank you.
Statistics
Current status
Biography articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Core | Other | ??? | Total | ||||
FA | 35 | 1,629 | 1,664 | ||||
FL | 203 | 203 | |||||
A | 1 | 131 | 132 | ||||
GA | 41 | 8,277 | 8,318 | ||||
B | 96 | 39,107 | 39,203 | ||||
C | 33 | 166,763 | 166,796 | ||||
Start | 2 | 755,065 | 755,067 | ||||
Stub | 1 | 1,036,977 | 1 | 1,036,979 | |||
List | 7,884 | 7,884 | |||||
Category | 2 | 335,618 | 335,620 | ||||
Disambig | 8,153 | 8,153 | |||||
File | 31,711 | 31,711 | |||||
Project | 229 | 229 | |||||
Redirect | 3 | 44,004 | 44,007 | ||||
Template | 20,392 | 20,392 | |||||
NA | 1,132 | 1,132 | |||||
Assessed | 214 | 2,457,275 | 1 | 2,457,490 | |||
Unassessed | 25,390 | 25,390 | |||||
Total | 214 | 2,482,665 | 1 | 2,482,880 | |||
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 10,795,855 | Ω = 5.38 |
Historical counts
July 2006 | August 2006 | September 2006 | October 2006 | November 2006 | December 2006 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FA | 34 | 3.80 % | 106 | 0.08 % | 185 | 0.11 % | 193 | 0.11 % | 212 | 0.11 % | 222 | 0.11 % | ||
A | 9 | 1.01 % | 57 | 0.04 % | 77 | 0.05 % | 95 | 0.05 % | 95 | 0.05 % | 104 | 0.05 % | ||
GA | 34 | 3.80 % | 137 | 0.10 % | 195 | 0.12 % | 195 | 0.11 % | 243 | 0.13 % | 266 | 0.14 % | ||
B | 220 | 24.61 % | 1,383 | 1.05 % | 1,967 | 1.21 % | 2,360 | 1.32 % | 2,682 | 1.44 % | 3,060 | 1.58 % | ||
Start | 104 | 11.63 % | 4,107 | 3.13 % | 5,634 | 3.47 % | 6,621 | 3.71 % | 7,980 | 4.30 % | 34,554 | 9.37 % | ||
Stub | 67 | 7.49 % | 3,515 | 2.68 % | 27,816 | 17.12 % | 41,572 | 23.27 % | 43,715 | 23.59 % | 46,635 | 24.15 % | ||
Assessed | 468 | 52.35 % | 9,305 | 7.10 % | 35,874 | 22.08 % | 51,036 | 28.56 % | 54,927 | 29.65 % | 59,904 | 31.03 % | ||
Unassessed | 426 | 47.65 % | 121,800 | 92.90 % | 126,581 | 77.92 % | 127,644 | 71.44 % | 130,325 | 70.35 % | 133,177 | 68.98 % | ||
Total | 894 | 131,105 | 162,455 | 178,680 | 185,252 | 193,081 | ||||||||
January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | April 2007 | |||||||||||
FA | 238 | 0.11 % | 248 | 0.12 % | 270 | 0.10 % | 286 | 0.08 % | 300 | 0.08 % | 317 | 0.08 % | ||
A | 105 | 0.05 % | 111 | 0.05 % | 109 | 0.04 % | 61 | 0.02 % | 51 | 0.01 % | 62 | 0.02 % | ||
GA | 297 | 0.14 % | 344 | 0.16 % | 358 | 0.13 % | 391 | 0.11 % | 415 | 0.11 % | 451 | 0.11 % | ||
B | 3,583 | 1.79 % | 4,553 | 2.15 % | 6,699 | 2.52 % | 7,420 | 2.01 % | 7,903 | 2.08 % | 9,941 | 2.52 % | ||
Start | 9,617 | 4.98 % | 12,049 | 6.02 % | 16,774 | 7.92 % | 29,405 | 11.05 % | 38,107 | 10.04 % | 60,286 | 15.44 % | ||
Stub | 49,852 | 24.91 % | 62,198 | 29.36 % | 85,677 | 32.02 % | 207,699 | 56.33 % | 219,635 | 57.87 % | 240,797 | 61.14 % | ||
Assessed | 66,124 | 33.05 % | 84,228 | 39.76 % | 122,518 | 46.05 % | 250,411 | 67.91 % | 266,411 | 70.19 % | 311,854 | 79.18 % | ||
Unassessed | 133,957 | 66.95 % | 127,639 | 60.25 % | 143,547 | 53.95 % | 118,311 | 32.09 % | 113,126 | 29.81 % | 81,996 | 20.82 % | ||
Total | 200,081 | 211,867 | 266,065 | 368,722 | 379,537 | 393,850 | ||||||||
July 2007 | August 2007 | September 2007 | October 2007 | November 2007 | December 2007 | |||||||||
FA | 325 | 0.08 % | 338 | 0.08 % | 360 | 0.08 % | 368 | 0.08 % | 389 | 0.09 % | 409 | 0.09 % | ||
A | 73 | 0.02 % | 67 | 0.02 % | 72 | 0.02 % | 73 | 0.02 % | 74 | 0.02 % | 22 | 0.005 % | ||
GA | 508 | 0.12 % | 547 | 0.13 % | 578 | 0.13 % | 606 | 0.14 % | 638 | 0.14 % | 705 | 0.15 % | ||
B | 11,345 | 2.77 % | 12,551 | 2.98 % | 13,017 | 2.95 % | 13,156 | 2.95 % | 13,323 | 2.95 % | 13,493 | 2.92 % | ||
Start | 72,224 | 17.61 % | 81,464 | 19.33 % | 88,191 | 19.98 % | 89,645 | 20.13 % | 91,489 | 20.27 % | 92,968 | 20.14 % | ||
Stub | 251,820 | 61.41 % | 263,069 | 62.41 % | 284,594 | 64.46 % | 285,629 | 64.15 % | 288,878 | 64.01 % | 296,518 | 64.22 % | ||
List | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 79 | 0.02 % | 75 | 0.02 % | ||||||
Assessed | 336,295 | 82.01 % | 358,036 | 84.94 % | 386,812 | 87.62 % | 389,477 | 87.48 % | 394,870 | 87.50 % | 404,190 | 87.54 % | ||
Unassessed | 73,770 | 17.99 % | 63,456 | 15.06 % | 54,677 | 12.38 % | 55,744 | 12.52 % | 56,426 | 12.50 % | 57,506 | 12.46 % | ||
Total | 410,065 | 421,492 | 441,489 | 445,221 | 451,296 | 461,696 | ||||||||
January 2008 | February 2008 | March 2008 | April 2008 | May 2008 | June 2008 | |||||||||
FA | 428 | 0.09 % | 441 | 0.09 % | 467 | 0.09 % | 484 | 0.09 % | 499 | 0.10 % | 515 | 0.10 % | ||
A | 19 | 0.004 % | 19 | 0.004 % | 20 | 0.004 % | 22 | 0.004 % | 20 | 0.004 % | 22 | 0.004 % | ||
GA | 757 | 0.15 % | 784 | 0.16 % | 878 | 0.17 % | 934 | 0.18 % | 983 | 0.19 % | 984 | 0.19 % | ||
B | 13,629 | 2.74 % | 13,698 | 2.74 % | 14,023 | 2.78 % | 14,160 | 2.78 % | 14,460 | 2.80 % | 14,594 | 2.79 % | ||
C | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 119 | 0.02 % | |||||||
Start | 94,615 | 19.03 % | 95,799 | 19.20 % | 100,651 | 19.92 % | 103,688 | 20.34 % | 109,457 | 21.19 % | 112,541 | 21.51 % | ||
Stub | 308,861 | 62.11 % | 311,161 | 62.35 % | 318,234 | 62.99 % | 323,539 | 63.47 % | 333,698 | 64.59 % | 340,940 | 65.16 % | ||
List | 93 | 0.02 % | 92 | 0.02 % | 106 | 0.02 % | 108 | 0.02 % | 109 | 0.02 % | 114 | 0.02 % | ||
Assessed | 418,402 | 84.13 % | 421,994 | 84.56 % | 434,379 | 85.98 % | 442,935 | 86.90 % | 459,226 | 88.89 % | 469,829 | 89.80 % | ||
Unassessed | 78,898 | 15.87 % | 77,071 | 15.44 % | 70,843 | 14.02 % | 66,799 | 13.10 % | 57,410 | 11.11 % | 53,385 | 10.20 % | ||
Total | 497,300 | 499,065 | 505,222 | 509,734 | 516,636 | 523,214 |
Monthly changes
August 2006 | September 2006 | October 2006 | November 2006 | December 2006 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FA | +72 | +211.76 % | +79 | +74.53 % | +8 | +4.32 % | +19 | +9.84 % | +10 | +4.72 % | ||
A | +48 | +533.33 % | +20 | +35.09 % | +18 | +23.38 % | +0 | +0.00 % | +9 | +9.47 % | ||
GA | +103 | +302.94 % | +58 | +42.34 % | +0 | +0.00 % | +48 | +24.62 % | +23 | +9.47 % | ||
B | +1,163 | +528.64 % | +584 | +42.23 % | +393 | +19.98 % | +322 | +13.64 % | +378 | +14.09 % | ||
Start | +4,003 | +3,849.04 % | +1,527 | +37.18 % | +987 | +17.52 % | +1,359 | +20.53 % | +1,637 | +20.51 % | ||
Stub | +3,448 | +5,146.27 % | +24,301 | +691.35 % | +13,756 | +49.45 % | +2,143 | +5.15 % | +2,920 | +6.68 % | ||
Assessed | +8,837 | +1,888.25 % | +26,569 | +285.53 % | +15,162 | +42.26 % | +3,891 | +7.62 % | +4,977 | +9.06 % | ||
Unassessed | +121,374 | +28,491.55 % | +4,781 | +3.93 % | +1,063 | +0.84 % | +2,681 | +2.10 % | +2,852 | +2.19 % | ||
Total | +130,211 | +14,564.99 % | +31,350 | +23.91 % | +16,225 | +9.99 % | +6,572 | +3.68 % | +7,829 | +4.23 % | ||
January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | April 2007 | |||||||||
FA | +16 | +6.72 % | +10 | +4.20 % | +22 | +8.87 % | +16 | +5.93 % | +14 | +4.90 % | ||
A | +1 | +0.96 % | +6 | +5.71 % | -2 | -1.80 % | -48 | -44.04 % | -10 | -16.39 % | ||
GA | +31 | +11.65 % | +47 | +15.83 % | +14 | +4.07 % | +33 | +9.22 % | +24 | +6.14 % | ||
B | +523 | +17.09 % | +970 | +27.07 % | +2,146 | +47.13 % | +721 | +10.76 % | +483 | +6.51 % | ||
Start | +2,432 | +25.29 % | +4,725 | +39.22 % | +12,631 | +75.30 % | +5,149 | +17.51 % | +8,702 | +29.59 % | ||
Stub | +3,217 | +6.90 % | +12,346 | +24.77 % | +23,479 | +37.75 % | +122,022 | +142.42 % | +11,936 | +5.75 % | ||
Assessed | +6,220 | +10.38 % | +18,104 | +27.28 % | +38,290 | +45.46 % | +127,893 | +104.39 % | +16,000 | +6.39 % | ||
Unassessed | +780 | +0.58 % | -6,318 | -4.72 % | +15,908 | +12.46 % | -25,236 | -17.58 % | -5,185 | -4.38 % | ||
Total | +7,000 | +3.63 % | +11,786 | +5.89 % | +54,198 | +25.58 % | +102,657 | +38.58 % | +10,815 | +2.93 % | ||
June 2007 | ||||||||||||
FA | +17 | +5.67 % | ||||||||||
A | +11 | +21.57 % | ||||||||||
GA | +36 | +8.67 % | ||||||||||
B | +2,038 | +25.79 % | ||||||||||
Start | +22,179 | +58.20 % | ||||||||||
Stub | +21,162 | +9.64 % | ||||||||||
Assessed | +45,443 | +17.06 % | ||||||||||
Unassessed | -31,130 | -27.52 % | ||||||||||
Total | +14,313 | +3.77 % |
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/Biography articles by quality log
Worklist
- The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.
This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump. |
This page was once used by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is preserved because of the information in its edit history. This page should not be edited or deleted. Wikiproject article lists can be generated using the WP 1.0 web tool.