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

• Incendies - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 23:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

• Exotica (film) - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

• Mommy (2014 film) - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 00:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

• Léolo - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 18:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

• The Barbarian Invasions - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 13:57, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

• Private Parts - request for article reassessment. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

• Logan's Run (film) - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 03:08, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

• Aloko Udapadi - request for a reconsideration. --Ceylonlion (talk) 10:04, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

• Harry Potter (character) - request reconsideration for B-class status. Facu-el Millo (talk) 05:03, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

• Gujarati cinema - request assessment for B-class.--Nizil (talk) 07:21, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

• Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 05:02, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

• Pirates 4-D - request reassessment; existing article rewritten and expanded. Oddjob84 (talk) 20:28, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

• It's Only the End of the World - request reconsideration for B-class status. Ribbet32 (talk) 02:34, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

• Good Morning, Vietnam - request for assessment for coverage and accuracy, and if passed, an upgrade to B-class status. HapHaxion (talk - contribs) 05:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

• Lady Bird (film) - request reconsideration for B-class status. ---- 🎼Yexstorm2001🎼 (talk) 16:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

• Like Sunday, Like Rain - Request assessment for status, expanded it since it was classified as start class. Rfl0216 (talk) 01:49, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

• A Golden Christmas - Requesting assessment as this article appears to be a fairly new stub. I came across it after someone recommended I watch the movie, and was disappointed by the lack of detail. It doesn't appear to have been acknowledged by any projects, so I was hoping listing here might lead to some improvement. Whether you can actually help is beyond my control, so beyond that, I have only one thing to say. Good luck :-) --Macks2008 (talk) 03:48, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

• An Emissary of No Return - Request assessment against the criteria for B-Class status. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
  •  Not done Plot summary may need an expansion for the B-class. Slightlymad 15:43, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

• Aadhi (film) - It's been improved since start-class. Let There Be Sunshine (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

• Blackball (film) - I've done a bit of an update for this article, but as not a member of the film WikiProject, and having never written one before, I'd appreciate it being reviewed by a member. I'd assume it's a start class right now, but better if it's reviewed by a member of the WikiProject. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

• Onir - Requesting assessment on a page I created a while ago while I was (still am) learning. I wouldn't know what class it would fall under, but I've definitely covered a lot and added good references. TheOneWorkingAccount (talk) 19:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

• Missing (2018 film) - Requesting assessment of a page I didn't create but made significant changes to it. Harsh Rathod Poke me! 17:17, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

• Ghare Baire (film) - Requesting assessment: the article has been substantially expanded since it was rated start class. Amuk (talk) 07:29, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

• Runaway (1984 North Korean film) - Request assessment against the criteria for B-Class status. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

• Salt (1985 film) - Request assessment against the criteria for B-Class status. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

• Crying for the Carolines - Request assessment: it was written yesterday. In Memoriam A.H.H.^{I am good at fighting windmills.}. 16:57, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

• The Iron Man (1930 film) - Requesting assessment as it is still unrated. In Memoriam A.H.H.^{What, you egg?}. 09:30, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

• The New Adventures of Pippi Longstocking - Request new assessment: the article has been expanded with new sources (i.e. Variety magazine articles) since a few days ago. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

• Spawn (film) (1997) - Request new assessment: the article has been expanded. I think the article reaches B Class, and would do a self assessment but I'd like feedback as to what else might be needed to improve the article even further.

I have filled out the Critical response section (there was little more than Rogert Ebert and negative reviews were needed to avoid WP:UNDUE and expand coverage, which I think is broadly representative), added a Legacy section (Spawn in relation to Black Panther), expanded the Production section (as it was a visual effects heavy film, more detail was relevant.) I filled many citations despite believing they were spurious requests that failed to look at references already in the same paragraph (and a few cases there were some out of print sources are genuinely difficult to check). I expect the article to remain stable or even become smaller as Spawn (reboot film) covers the ongoing efforts towards a sequel or reboot. -- 109.79.161.65 (talk) 00:10, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Statistics

Current status

Overall project

Film pages by quality
Quality
	Total
FA	190
FL	482
FM	33
A	1
GA	1,428
B	1,480
C	10,531
Start	71,494
Stub	96,438
List	13,184
Category	54,508
Disambig	372
File	110,868
Portal	19
Project	229
Redirect	11,729
Template	9,510
NA	18
Assessed	382,514
Unassessed	5
Total	382,519
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 985,519			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	118	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	923	3	25	0	0	174	59	15	5	96	68	8	1	18
B	861	4	42	1	0	155	60	16	13	84	60	8	8	81
C	4,985	44	266	12	0	899	381	162	57	287	231	66	106	458
Start	26,034	324	1,501	72	0	5,259	2,309	1,813	265	638	147	578	831	2,084
Stub	29,987	1,236	1,762	179	0	6,228	3,622	1,917	156	174	3	488	705	1,830
FL	220	1	3	1	0	40	6	1	0	14	0	257	1	0
List	3,003	117	254	19	0	550	442	372	5	72	0	5,901	679	139
Category	5,668	78	650	73	0	1,395	483	332	105	333	0	794	441	15,059
Disambig	28	0	1	0	0	2	1	1	0	3	0	8	0	3
File	607	0	3	0	0	54	11	13	4	215	0	17	3	8
Portal	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Redirect	2,324	160	72	2	0	364	114	28	32	355	0	602	52	377
Template	638	50	0	12	0	135	73	106	5	56	0	701	46	181
NA	16	0	0	0	0	1	2	0	1	1	2	2	1	6
Unassessed	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total	75,651	2,018	4,616	372	−3	15,287	7,577	4,776	652	2,399	533	9,434	2,877	20,268
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	59	39	176	23	69	9	18	17	3	19	12	12	85
C	0	368	231	1,735	187	394	97	52	135	19	180	74	236	858
Start	0	2,504	1,408	14,711	1,471	2,107	934	187	830	183	1,663	929	1,082	2,292
Stub	0	5,737	5,625	10,067	5,343	2,045	769	185	2,690	379	1,280	1,959	1,373	1,411
FL	0	5	1	112	2	5	3	0	0	0	9	0	1	3
List	0	389	174	2,135	271	252	248	27	228	23	338	220	193	54
Category	0	640	388	1,152	434	677	158	107	706	67	602	403	209	593
Disambig	0	1	2	76	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	3
File	0	32	20	152	13	65	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	39	979	68	262	24	10	50	9	42	25	24	37
Template	0	348	163	397	82	100	36	4	135	30	82	60	74	26
NA	0	3	0	7	0	1	0	0	0	0	2	0	1	4
Unassessed	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0
Total	−3	10,255	8,136	30,393	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3	−3

Historical counts

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