Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Anime and manga! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Anime and manga 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.
Someone put a {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} template on an article, but it's not an anime or manga related topic. What should I do?
Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
What is the purpose of the article ratings?
The objective of the rating system is twofold. First, it allows the project to monitor the quality of the articles within our scope and to prioritize work on these articles. Second, the ratings will be used by the Wikipedia 1.0 project to compile a "released version" of Wikipedia that can be distributed to readers. Please note, however, that these ratings are meant for the internal use of the project, and do not imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of the Anime and manga WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes. Editors should also note that B-Class assessments require project consensus, while GA, FA, and FL assessments have associated formal review processes that must be followed.
How do I rate an article?
Check the assessment scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article, then follow the guidelines below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
How can I make a request for someone from the project to assess an article?
Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
Where can I get more details or feedback about an article?
The peer review process is one that results in a more thorough examination of articles; to ensure project members also view the article, make sure to list it at our peer review page.
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 (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!
What about lists?
Lists of episodes, characters, and chapters are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status. Lists which are pure lists of links, however, should be assessed as list class, as they have no real content to be evaluated.
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.
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;
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
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.
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.
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.
(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.
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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.
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.
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);
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.
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.
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class 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. 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.
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.
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:
A useful picture or graphic
Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
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.
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.
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.
These criteria apply to general-content articles. The manual of style provides additional guidelines about what sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.
Each anime- and manga-related article has its assessment included within the {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} template, such as {{WikiProject Anime and manga|class=B}}. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Anime and manga articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.
B-Class criteria
Special emphasis is given to the six criteria that B-Class articles for the WikiProject should meet:
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class 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.
Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If importance values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the article falls under. An article judged to be "Top-importance" in one context may be only "Mid-importance" 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). Articles rated as "low-importance" importance are not necessarily unwanted, but may be candidates for merging into more relevant when appropriate.
All lists, video games and any other notable article that falls within the WikiProject's scope, including most websites, not described in the table below is of low-importance.
Type
Top
High
Mid
Definition
This article is of the utmost importance as it forms the basis of all information.
This article is fairly important as it covers a general area of knowledge.
This article is relatively important as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Series (Main article)
N/A
Lasting impact decades after it was initially released, e.g. Gundam.
Achieved wide commercial success or critically acclaimed outside of Japan, e.g. Sailor Moon.
Characters
N/A
Characters that have become cultural icons outside of the series, e.g. Char Aznable.
Individuals with a career of highly influential works, or historically significant accomplishments, e.g. Akira Toriyama, Eiichiro Oda.
Individuals with a career of internationally successful or critically acclaimed works, e.g. Ken Akamatsu, Rumiko Takahashi.
Companies, organisations, websites
Highly influential companies, particularly the major Japanese companies involved in manga and/or anime production, e.g. Bones, Sunrise, Shueisha, Shogakukan.
Top licensors and distributors of manga/anime in English language countries, e.g. Viz Media, Tokyopop, A.D. Vision
GA class — Covers everything well; must be nominated at WP:GAN and passed by an impartial reviewer in order to qualify. Before nominating, the page should include inline sourcing for controversial statements, contain critical reception information, and have no image copyright issues.
The following are guidelines for episode and chapter lists. Lists are normally assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status, and are not assessed as either good articles or A-class.
List class — Transcludes sublists, volume lists which have been split into sublists, or lists which have no potential as articles (such as stand-alone lists and lists which act as navigational aids; this includes, amongst other, lists of series licensed by a publisher). Articles assessed as list class jump straight to featured list status after passing WP:FLC, instead of progressing along the regular assessment scale.
Stub class — Little structure; severely lacking content, such as chapter names, release dates, or plot summaries. Does not use the appropriate formatting templates ({{Japanese episode list}} for episode lists, or {{Graphic novel list}} for chapter lists) but a simple table, bullet list, numbered list or no formatting at all.
Start class — Some structure, basic overview of the topic present; uses the correct formatting templates, but severely lacks content. Basic lead is present.
C class — Decent structure; lacks Japanese chapter titles, release information, or references.
B class — Coherent structure, proper lead, well-referenced with no missing information.
List of Rosario + Vampire chapters - I have provided missing summaries and links to key characters for each volume. Also updated volume references to the current Viz and Shueisha links. It should be ready for B class. -AngusWOOF (talk) 03:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Too early, still list class. I think the summaries could still be boiled down to the min. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 07:38, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
C. Ref 1 doesn't seem to cover the airdates. You got the initial date and three broadcast stations though. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 07:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 1 helped with the Japanese titles. The series premiered on Tokyo MX. I found a link there (Ref 9) that has the airdates. —KirtZMessage 10:16, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, nine sources the first twelve episode airdates. Missing the last episode though. Use deadurl=no to use the live site as the main instead of the archive. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 17:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. They're all sourced now. Used ref 6 for the OVA. —KirtZMessage 07:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
B. Consider adopting the 30em for reflist instead of 2 columns. I also suggest merging the character list, and leaving only the significant information. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 10:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
List of Log Horizon episodes - B now? Since last rating there are more references with archives for the premiere dates and simplification of some of the technical gaming terms. —KirtZMessage 07:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
List of Rosario + Vampire characters - The manga series has completed. This underwent a major overhaul to simplify the descriptions, add reception, and tons of references to the manga and anime. Would appreciate detailed feedback on the talk page. -AngusWOOF (talk) 22:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've trimmed down a bunch more details and made changes per feedback. -AngusWOOF (talk) 04:25, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Another round? I've cleaned up the jargon terms, POV/OR verbiage, organized the reception section by key topics, and beefed up the character development section. -AngusWOOF (talk) 03:27, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. Did a major reorganization to group the characters into sections and bullet lists. Hopefully the structure will work. Appreciate any additional feedback from there. -AngusWOOF (talk) 18:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wāqwāq - I don't know if its plot (and maybe prose) is (are) clear enough, but now with sure better than start-class. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 07:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
C. Quite a bit of grammar errors in plot and volume list. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 07:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nisekoi's ready for a bump, at least to C. The anime series is still ongoing, but shouldn't affect the summary or characters since there are plenty of manga chapters. If someone wants to qualify it against B standards, go for it. -AngusWOOF (talk) 05:50, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Space Dandy - I was about to assess it as Start, but since I created the article, I can't really re-assess it. Can someone do it for me? Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 01:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kotoko (singer) - I'm not sure if it's good enough for C-class (the article is pretty short), but I've sourced pretty much whatever can be sourced. Is it good enough? If not, what else needs to be done? Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 01:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
B, assuming most available sources have been used for the article's content. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 04:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Haruhi Suzumiya - It's been more than a year since my last request. I think some merchandise is still coming out, but the manga just ended and there's been no news for the LN for several years now. High-class? Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 01:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
High class would require media to still be made on the series, 20 years after its debut. Maybe if something comes out in 2023. Missing references for international licenses, so C class. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 04:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Aoi Yūki - Probably Start-class now since her article has had a (relatively short) Biography section for about a year now. Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 13:26, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's already start. It could be argued for C class but I'd like to see more content beforehand. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 01:37, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. Popular pages still says it's stub. The article classes in that page so need updating (I nearly added Kill la Kill in this batch, until I saw it was already C-class). Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 02:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mami Kawada - Now I know this article will probably still be assessed as C, but since Kurosaki's article was just assessed as C, I was wondering if Kawada's article is getting closer to B-class. Her article fails B1 (a few parts still need sources, I'll try to get to those in a few days) and B5 (no image, but as I mentioned here last year, no free images for her seem to exist). However, B5 reads in part (italics mine): "Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included..." which means, since her article does have an infobox, and it seems no free image for her exists (at least for now), perhaps the only criteria that needs to be addressed is B1? And if so, how close is the article to B-class? Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 13:26, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Final sentence (Tokyo Ravens part) is unsourced. Yeah, I can pass it for B5 since it can be argued free images don't exist. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 01:37, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tokyo Ravens citations added. Is it finally time for B-class? Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 02:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yamishibai: Japanese Ghost Stories - I'm unsure as to whether or not C will be the highest that this page will ever attain. Nonetheless, it is definitely better since its last assessment so at least some of the remaining B-class criteria should be met. I tried getting every last scrap of information out there and this is what resulted. —KirtZMail 20:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I actually have issues with the content and structure so I'll have to come back to this later. If I rated this without a second thought, I'd give it a C while failing B1 and B3. DragonZero (Talk·Contribs) 06:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. If you could give me a nudge about the structure that would be great. Also please keep in mind that this is one of the smaller series out there in terms of coverage—at least from what I can deduce. —KirtZMail 15:57, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mystery of Mamo - Complete rewrite/expansion in recent weeks. The plot summary is a mess, but frankly this is more because the plot of the film is ridiculous. Trying to summarise it while keeping it as small as possible took some effort (reduced by 400 words). I doubt it could easily be reduced further.Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lupin The Third Part I - I self assessed it as start when moving it to mainspace but it may well be C class. I'm not finished, but am taking a break from it.Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Graph of project assessments since the assessment scale was adopted
A full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly. Archives of previous
featured article candidates
(2006,
2007,
2008),
A-class reviews
(2006,
2007,
2008),
good article reviews
(2008)
and requests for assessment
(2008,
2009,
2010,
2011)
are also available.
