Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Assessment: Difference between revisions
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
#[[The Wolverine (film)]] - Rated Start, hope to get a better grade and some advice on a future GA nom. [[User:Igordebraga|igordebraga]] [[User_talk:Igordebraga|≠]] 01:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC) |
#[[The Wolverine (film)]] - Rated Start, hope to get a better grade and some advice on a future GA nom. [[User:Igordebraga|igordebraga]] [[User_talk:Igordebraga|≠]] 01:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC) |
||
*[[Special Chabbis]], Start Class impending B-Class review. <font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0em 0em 0.8em,#FF4500 -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#90EE90 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#696969">[[User:Sohambanerjee1998|$oHƎM]]❊[[User talk:Sohambanerjee1998|<font style="color:Gold"><b>আড্ডা</b></font>]]</font> 14:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC) |
*[[Special Chabbis]], Start Class impending B-Class review. <font style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0em 0em 0.8em,#FF4500 -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#90EE90 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;color:#696969">[[User:Sohambanerjee1998|$oHƎM]]❊[[User talk:Sohambanerjee1998|<font style="color:Gold"><b>আড্ডা</b></font>]]</font> 14:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
*[[Re:Generation]] - Rated as stub, but based on the criteria listed above, in my opinion it should be a start or C because there's not anymore info on the documentary. All the info is taken straight from the music project's website and I've spent hours looking elsewhere only to come up with info that is the same as the project's site or even less detailed. |
|||
<!-- ADD NEW REQUESTS ABOVE THIS LINE. Be sure to sign your request with a time stamp. --> |
<!-- ADD NEW REQUESTS ABOVE THIS LINE. Be sure to sign your request with a time stamp. --> |
||
Revision as of 18:45, 11 August 2013
Main page | Assessment | Help | Participants | Coordinators | Spotlight | Outreach | Resources | Portal | Recognized 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 assessment is generated from the class
parameter in the {{WikiProject Film}}
project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Film|class=}}
Quality scale
Articles are automatically placed in an appropriate subcategory of Category:Film articles by quality by adding a label to the class
parameter of the project banner:
{{WikiProject Film|class=FA}}
adds an article to Category:FA-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=FL}}
adds an article to Category:FL-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=GA}}
adds an article to Category:GA-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=B}}
adds an article to Category:B-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=C}}
adds an article to Category:C-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=Start}}
adds an article to Category:Start-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=Stub}}
adds an article to Category:Stub-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=List}}
adds an article to Category:List-Class film articles
Other non-article pages may also be categorized in the same way:
{{WikiProject Film|class=Disambig}}
adds a page to Category:Disambig-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=Category}}
adds a page to Category:Category-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=Template}}
adds a page to Category:Template-Class film articles{{WikiProject Film|class=NA}}
adds a page to Category:NA-Class film articles
If the class
parameter is left empty, the article or page will be placed in Category:Unassessed film articles.
You should not arbitrarily assign FA, FL or GA grades to an article. To receive these grades, an article must first pass through these processes for approval: |
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
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.
|
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:
|
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:
|
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:
|
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.
- Inside Man - Requesting reassessment.--SuperSonic2000 (talk) 10:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
- On hold. Currently up for GA review. Betty Logan (talk) 21:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Beyond the Black Rainbow - Requesting a "good article" assessment.--Musicaindustrial (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
- To submit an article for GA assessment you should follow the instructions at WP:GAN/I; however it won't pass in its current state since there is insufficient coverage of the production period. Betty Logan (talk) 21:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
- Legend of a Rabbit - Expanded with reliable sources. Reassess please. EditorEat ma talk page up, scotty! 01:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Jack the Giant Slayer - Recently failed a GA nom, seems better than Start. igordebraga ≠ 01:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- The Wolverine (film) - Rated Start, hope to get a better grade and some advice on a future GA nom. igordebraga ≠ 01:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Special Chabbis, Start Class impending B-Class review. $oHƎM❊আড্ডা 14:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
- Re:Generation - Rated as stub, but based on the criteria listed above, in my opinion it should be a start or C because there's not anymore info on the documentary. All the info is taken straight from the music project's website and I've spent hours looking elsewhere only to come up with info that is the same as the project's site or even less detailed.
If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please list it for peer review instead.
Statistics
Current status
Overall project
Film pages by quality | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | |||||||
Total | |||||||
FA | 187 | ||||||
FL | 481 | ||||||
A | 1 | ||||||
GA | 1,419 | ||||||
B | 1,437 | ||||||
C | 10,255 | ||||||
Start | 70,805 | ||||||
Stub | 96,430 | ||||||
List | 13,090 | ||||||
Category | 53,296 | ||||||
Disambig | 366 | ||||||
File | 109,239 | ||||||
Portal | 19 | ||||||
Project | 228 | ||||||
Redirect | 11,521 | ||||||
Template | 9,436 | ||||||
NA | 9 | ||||||
Assessed | 378,219 | ||||||
Unassessed | 4 | ||||||
Total | 378,223 | ||||||
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 980,776 | Ω = 5.43 |
Statistics by task force
Historical counts
This WikiProject Film page is an archive, log collection, or currently inactive page; it is kept primarily for historical interest. |
- Historical counts for the overall project. All figures are taken from the end of each quarter.
Quality | June 2006 | September 2006 | December 2006 | March 2007 | June 2007 | September 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FA | 18 | 0.17% | 23 | 0.18% | 34 | 0.2% | 41 | 0.18% | 51 | 0.18% | 56 | 0.18% | |||||||||||||
FL | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | |||||||||||||||||||
A | 2 | 0.02% | 5 | 0.04% | 6 | 0.03% | 5 | 0.02% | 8 | 0.03% | 12 | 0.04% | |||||||||||||
GA | 8 | 0.08% | 11 | 0.09% | 28 | 0.16% | 57 | 0.25% | 61 | 0.22% | 85 | 0.27% | |||||||||||||
B | 72 | 0.68% | 540 | 4.29% | 860 | 4.95% | 954 | 4.25% | 967 | 3.5% | 1006 | 3.22% | |||||||||||||
Start | 54 | 0.51% | 3455 | 27.42% | 5611 | 32.29% | 5852 | 26.09% | 6021 | 21.8% | 6164 | 19.71% | |||||||||||||
Stub | 7 | 0.07% | 6676 | 52.99% | 10831 | 62.33% | 15516 | 69.18% | 20503 | 74.25% | 22236 | 71.11% | |||||||||||||
List | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | |||||||||||||||||||
Assessed | 161 | 1.53% | 10710 | 85.01% | 17370 | 99.96% | 22425 | 99.99% | 27611 | 99.99% | 29559 | 94.53% | |||||||||||||
Unassessed | 10375 | 98.47% | 1889 | 14.99% | 7 | 0.04% | 3 | 0.01% | 2 | 0.01% | 1712 | 5.47% | |||||||||||||
Total | 10536 | 12599 | 17377 | 22428 | 27613 | 31271 | |||||||||||||||||||
Quality | December 2007 | March 2008 | June 2008 | September 2008 | December 2008 | March 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||
FA | 71 | 0.19% | 80 | 0.2% | 72 | 0.17% | 72 | 0.16% | 73 | 0.15% | 77 | 0.14% | |||||||||||||
FL | n/a | n/a | 12 | 0.03% | 22 | 0.05% | 24 | 0.05% | 27 | 0.05% | |||||||||||||||
A | 28 | 0.08% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0% | 1 | 0.002% | 2 | 0.004% | |||||||||||||
GA | 136 | 0.37% | 154 | 0.38% | 189 | 0.44% | 217 | 0.47% | 249 | 0.51% | 274 | 0.5% | |||||||||||||
B | 1221 | 3.32% | 1312 | 3.26% | 1339 | 3.11% | 251 | 0.55% | 259 | 0.53% | 274 | 0.5% | |||||||||||||
Start | 7093 | 19.28% | 7557 | 18.76% | 7871 | 18.26% | 9247 | 20.12% | 9540 | 19.52% | 9866 | 18.04% | |||||||||||||
Stub | 25212 | 68.53% | 27607 | 68.52% | 29811 | 69.15% | 32182 | 70.01% | 34515 | 70.62% | 36811 | 67.32% | |||||||||||||
List | 3015 | 8.19% | 3580 | 8.88% | 3804 | 8.82% | 3979 | 8.66% | 4106 | 8.4% | 4465 | 8.17% | |||||||||||||
Assessed | 36776 | 99.96% | 40290 | 99.99% | 43098 | 99.97% | 45970 | 100% | 48767 | 99.78% | 51796 | 94.72% | |||||||||||||
Unassessed | 16 | 0.04% | 3 | 0.01% | 11 | 0.03% | 0 | 0% | 108 | 0.22% | 2885 | 5.28% | |||||||||||||
Total | 36792 | 40293 | 43109 | 45970 | 48875 | 54681 | |||||||||||||||||||
Quality | June 2009 | September 2009 | December 2009 | March 2010 | June 2010 | September 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
FA | 75 | 0.14% | 76 | 0.12% | 77 | 0.12% | 78 | 0.12% | 78 | 0.12% | 80 | 0.11% | |||||||||||||
FL | 33 | 0.06% | 34 | 0.06% | 34 | 0.05% | 35 | 0.05% | 40 | 0.06% | 45 | 0.06% | |||||||||||||
A | 3 | 0.005% | 3 | 0.005% | 2 | 0.003% | 2 | 0.003% | 2 | 0.003% | 2 | 0.003% | |||||||||||||
GA | 278 | 0.5% | 277 | 0.45% | 283 | 0.45% | 296 | 0.46% | 317 | 0.49% | 324 | 0.43% | |||||||||||||
B | 313 | 0.56% | 331 | 0.54% | 366 | 0.58% | 407 | 0.63% | 411 | 0.63% | 410 | 0.54% | |||||||||||||
C | n/a | n/a | 450 | 0.72% | 1646 | 2.57% | 1726 | 2.66% | 1789 | 2.38% | |||||||||||||||
Start | 10023 | 18.05% | 10349 | 16.89% | 10290 | 16.41% | 10288 | 16.04% | 11161 | 17.23% | 11642 | 15.46% | |||||||||||||
Stub | 38342 | 69.04% | 40956 | 66.82% | 42782 | 68.23% | 42215 | 68.95% | 45610 | 70.42% | 48311 | 64.14% | |||||||||||||
List | 4315 | 7.77% | 4418 | 7.21% | 4861 | 7.75% | 5159 | 8.05% | 5296 | 8.18% | 5410 | 7.18% | Category | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | 4760 | 6.32% | |||||
Disambig | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | 250 | 0.33% | ||||||||||||||||||
Template | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | 1845 | 2.45% | ||||||||||||||||||
NA | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | 33 | 0.04% | ||||||||||||||||||
Assessed | 53382 | 96.13% | 56444 | 92.09% | 59145 | 94.32% | 62126 | 96.88% | 64653 | 99.82% | 74926 | 99.47% | |||||||||||||
Unassessed | 2151 | 3.87% | 4847 | 7.91% | 3559 | 5.68% | 2000 | 3.12% | 114 | 0.18% | 400 | 0.53% | |||||||||||||
Total | 55533 | 61291 | 62704 | 64126 | 64767 | 75326 | |||||||||||||||||||
Quality | December 2010 | March 2011 | June 2011 | September 2011 | December 2011 | March 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||
FA | 81 | 0.1% | 81 | 0.1% | 81 | 0.09% | 82 | 0.09% | 82 | 0.08% | 84 | 0.08% | |||||||||||||
FL | 46 | 0.06% | 46 | 0.06% | 49 | 0.06% | 57 | 0.06% | 59 | 0.06% | 62 | 0.06% | |||||||||||||
A | 2 | 0.003% | 2 | 0.002% | 3 | 0.003% | 2 | 0% | 2 | 0% | 2 | 0% | |||||||||||||
GA | 337 | 0.43% | 360 | 0.43% | 372 | 0.43% | 390 | 0.42% | 415 | 0.43% | 428 | 0.42% | |||||||||||||
B | 423 | 0.54% | 422 | 0.51% | 429 | 0.49% | 436 | 0.47% | 436 | 0.45% | 440 | 0.43% | |||||||||||||
C | 1832 | 2.34% | 1894 | 2.28% | 1950 | 2.23% | 2014 | 2.21% | 2115 | 2.18% | 2204 | 2.14% | |||||||||||||
Start | 12004 | 15.35% | 12545 | 15.12% | 13036 | 14.91% | 13644 | 14.74% | 14219 | 14.67% | 15302 | 14.86% | |||||||||||||
Stub | 50211 | 64.2% | 53569 | 64.57% | 54723 | 62.6% | 57919 | 62.58% | 60797 | 62.74% | 61510 | 59.72% | |||||||||||||
List | 5418 | 6.93% | 5537 | 6.67% | 5918 | 6.77% | 6090 | 6.58% | 6410 | 6.61% | 6621 | 6.43% | |||||||||||||
Category | 5286 | 6.76% | 5463 | 6.59% | 7461 | 8.54% | 7914 | 8.55% | 8245 | 8.51% | 9195 | 8.93% | |||||||||||||
Disambig | 247 | 0.32% | 259 | 0.33% | 266 | 0.3% | 273 | 0.29% | 274 | 0.28% | 297 | 0.29% | |||||||||||||
Template | 1927 | 2.46% | 2683 | 3.23% | 3014 | 3.45% | 3217 | 3.48% | 3307 | 3.41% | 3637 | 3.53% | |||||||||||||
NA | 18 | 0.02% | 53 | 0.06% | 62 | 0.07% | 274 | 0.2% | 449 | 0.46% | 671 | 0.08% | |||||||||||||
Assessed | 77868 | 99.57% | 82953 | 100% | 87404 | 99.99% | 92295 | 99.72% | 96852 | 99.94% | 100227 | 97.3% | |||||||||||||
Unassessed | 337 | 0.43% | 4 | 0% | 8 | 0.01% | 256 | 0.28% | 56 | 0.06% | 2777 | 2.7% | |||||||||||||
Total | 78205 | 82957 | 87412 | 92551 | 96908 | 103004 | |||||||||||||||||||
Quality | June 2012 | September 2012 | December 2012 | March 2013 | June 2013 | September 2013 | |||||||||||||||||||
FA | 85 | 0.08% | 88 | 0.08% | 92 | 0.08% | 90 | 0.06% | 92 | 0.08% | 98 | 0.08% | |||||||||||||
FL | 63 | 0.06% | 67 | 0.06% | 75 | 0.07% | 81 | 0.07% | 90 | 0.08% | 100 | 0.08% | |||||||||||||
A | 2 | 0.002% | 4 | 0.004% | 4 | 0% | 4 | 0% | 4 | 0% | 3 | 0% | |||||||||||||
GA | 445 | 0.42% | 464 | 0.43% | 479 | 0.43% | 507 | 0.44% | 538 | 0.46% | 558 | 0.46% | |||||||||||||
B | 445 | 0.42% | 450 | 0.42% | 449 | 0.4% | 453 | 0.39% | 456 | 0.39% | 463 | 0.38% | |||||||||||||
C | 2298 | 2.19% | 2404 | 2.24% | 2479 | 2.21% | 2535 | 2.21% | 2571 | 2.18% | 2644 | 2.19% | |||||||||||||
Start | 15644 | 14.9% | 16836 | 15.67% | 18805 | 16.78% | 20519 | 17.87% | 21858 | 18.5% | 24348 | 20.19% | |||||||||||||
Stub | 62090 | 59.12% | 62637 | 58.3% | 66150 | 59.04% | 66389 | 57.8% | 67710 | 57.31% | 66715 | 55.32% | |||||||||||||
List | 6673 | 6.35% | 6780 | 6.31% | 7105 | 6.34% | 7264 | 6.32% | 7384 | 6.25% | 7494 | 6.21% | |||||||||||||
Category | 9417 | 8.97% | 9496 | 8.84% | 9766 | 8.72% | 10029 | 8.73% | 10813 | 9.15% | 11445 | 9.49% | |||||||||||||
Disambig | 301 | 0.29% | 307 | 0.29% | 315 | 0.28% | 325 | 0.28% | 327 | 0.28% | 341 | 0.28% | |||||||||||||
File | n/a | 693 | 0.62% | 751 | 0.65% | 804 | 0.68% | 842 | 0.7% | ||||||||||||||||
Redirect | n/a | 499 | 0.46% | 720 | 0.64% | 799 | 0.28% | 833 | 0.71% | 919 | 0.76% | ||||||||||||||
Template | 3713 | 3.54% | 3876 | 3.61% | 4105 | 3.66% | 4245 | 3.7% | 4359 | 3.69% | 4421 | 3.67% | |||||||||||||
NA | 832 | 0.79% | 698 | 0.65% | 68 | 0.06% | 35 | 0.03% | 33 | 0.03% | 34 | 0.03% | |||||||||||||
Assessed | 102052 | 97.18% | 104650 | 97.41% | 110629 | 98.73% | 144701 | 125.99% | 117954 | 99.84% | 120507 | 99.93% | |||||||||||||
Unassessed | 2963 | 2.82% | 2783 | 2.59% | 2783 | 1.27% | 154 | 0.13% | 154 | 0.16% | 88 | 0.07% | |||||||||||||
Total | 105015 | 107433 | 112050 | 114855 | 118145 | 120595 |
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