Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy/Assessment
Energy articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
![]() |
1 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 12 | ||
![]() |
1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
![]() |
1 | 1 | |||||
![]() |
3 | 4 | 26 | 49 | 2 | 84 | |
B | 20 | 90 | 150 | 247 | 67 | 574 | |
C | 34 | 209 | 431 | 1,239 | 1 | 370 | 2,284 |
Start | 1 | 176 | 755 | 5,436 | 1,450 | 7,818 | |
Stub | 17 | 149 | 4,054 | 1,640 | 5,860 | ||
List | 37 | 69 | 327 | 2 | 121 | 556 | |
Category | 6,169 | 6,169 | |||||
Disambig | 4 | 31 | 35 | ||||
File | 70 | 70 | |||||
Portal | 153 | 153 | |||||
Project | 14 | 14 | |||||
Template | 3 | 8 | 249 | 260 | |||
NA | 2 | 36 | 46 | 351 | 510 | 945 | |
Other | 1 | 86 | 87 | ||||
Assessed | 61 | 570 | 1,637 | 11,722 | 7,285 | 3,650 | 24,925 |
Unassessed | 1 | 10 | 1 | 937 | 949 | ||
Total | 61 | 570 | 1,638 | 11,732 | 7,286 | 4,587 | 25,874 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 85,277 | Ω = 5.13 |
Welcome to the assessment department of the Energy WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Energy or the people of Energy. 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 Energy}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Energy 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 Energy 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 and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Energy}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Energy |class= |attention= |collaboration-candidate= |past-collaboration= |peer-review= |old-peer-review= |needs-infobox= }}
The following values may be used for the class parameter:
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class energy articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class energy articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class energy articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class energy articles)
- C (adds articles to Category:C-Class energy articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class energy articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class energy articles)
- NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article energy pages)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed energy articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
Quality scale
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
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) |
![]() |
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) |
![]() |
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) |
![]() |
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 |
Requesting an 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.
- 2009 Russia–Ukraine gas dispute - Substantially reworked. Further suggestions and constructive criticism welcome.LokiiT (talk) 16:48, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
- Statoil Fuel & Retail - Article about a new company (spin-off from existing Fortune 50 company). Bifrost2 (talk) 23:54, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
- Dynamic tidal power - Page is not a stub anymore. Should be class B by now. Also, considering heavy emphasis by The Netherlands, European Commission and Chinese government, importance level should be raised to High or even Top. Will make further additions in coming weeks, to reflect recent developments. Keen to have an outside opinion. UNguyinChina
- Nationalization of oil supplies - Significantly improved and expanded by a policy class project last month. Is it B yet? 24.216.225.123 (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
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.
August 21, 2024
Reassessed
- Electric or Electricity Act (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- International Energy Agency Energy in Buildings and Communities Programme (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Wind power in Estonia (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Oil and gas industry in Bolivia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Trydan Gwyrdd Cymru (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
August 20, 2024
Reassessed
- British Energy Efficiency Federation (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Electriquette (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- Hub Power Company (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Olkaria VII Geothermal Power Station (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Electric or Electricity Act (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as List-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Gas Act (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as List-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
- Bharat Small Reactor (talk) removed.
August 19, 2024
Reassessed
- 1992 Colombian energy crisis (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Emil Lenz (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Hamitabat power station (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
- Trenton Channel Power Plant (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- 2024 Lebanese blackout (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Draft:Bharat Small Reactor (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- DeAnn Walker (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Electriquette (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Peter Fox-Penner (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Power outages in Oceania (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:United States secretaries of energy (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Électricité du Liban (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
- Category:United States Secretaries of Energy (talk) removed.
August 18, 2024
Renamed
Assessed
- Lists of generating stations in Canada (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Nuclear Industry (Finance) Act 1977 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Quantum Cascade Detector (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
August 17, 2024
Assessed
- Draft:Kronos Fusion Energy Incorporated (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
August 16, 2024
Renamed
- Gazivoda Dam renamed to Ujmani Dam.
Reassessed
- Industry of Pakistan (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Timeline of the oil and gas industry in the United Kingdom (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to List-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Draft:Conrad U. Brunner (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Environmental impact of fossil fuels (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Jwaneng Solar Power Station (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Draft:Master Group of Industries (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Nuclear Installations Act 1969 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Ujmani Dam (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
August 15, 2024
Reassessed
- Energy-rich species (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Energy in Algeria (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Renewable energy (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Tejo Power Station (history) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Atomic Energy Act 1989 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Ministers of industries, energy and mining of Uruguay (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
August 14, 2024
Reassessed
- Bosch Solar Energy (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- Es-Salam nuclear reactor (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Nawara Development Project (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Atomic Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1981 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Energy in Algeria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- History of passive solar building design (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Ministers of energy and mines of Algeria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Ministers of energy of Kazakhstan (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
- Category:Algerian Ministers of Energy and Mines (talk) removed.
- Draft:IEEE P81 (talk) removed.
- Category:Ministers of Energy (Kazakhstan) (talk) removed.
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.