Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Assessments

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to the assessment department of the Christian music WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Christian music related 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 {{Christianmusic}} banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Christian music articles by quality and Category:Christian music articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Contents

Frequently asked questions[edit]

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 Christian music WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? 
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.
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[edit]

Quality assessments[edit]

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Christian music}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Christian music|class=???}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Quality scale for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Christian music articles) Featured article FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Christian music articles) A-Class article A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Christian music articles)  GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Christian music articles) B-Class article B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Christian music articles) C-Class article C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Christian music articles) Start-Class article Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Christian music articles) Stub-Class article Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Christian music articles) Featured list FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Christian music articles)  List 

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

Book (for Wikipedia books; adds pages to Category:Book-Class Christian music articles) Wikipedia Book Book 
Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Christian music articles) Category page Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Christian music articles) Disambiguation page Disambig 
File (for files; adds pages to Category:File-Class Christian music articles)  File 
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Christian music articles) Redirect page Redirect 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Christian music articles)  Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Christian music articles)  Project 
Template (for templates; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Christian music articles)  Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Christian music articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Christian music articles)  ??? 

After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added either to the article's talk page or to the /Comments subpage which will appear as a link next to the assessment. Adding comments will add the article to Category:Christian music articles with comments. Comments that are added to the /Comments subpages will be transcluded onto the automatically generated work list pages in the Comments column.

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Importance assessment[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{Christianmusic}} project banner on its talk page:

{{Christianmusic| ... | importance=??? | ...}}
Top
High
Mid
Low
???

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

Importance scale[edit]

Generally
Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Top The article is one of the core topics about Christian music. A reader who is not involved in the field of Christian music will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily. Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages. Christian music
High The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding Christian music. This article is fairly important to this project; The subject of an article in this category is likely well known and influential in Christian music, and known in the general market as well, within their musical genre.
Mid The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in the history of Christian music. Subject contributes to the total scope of the project, and may not necessarily be famous. Subject fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas. Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject. Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand Christian music. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text.
Low The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of Christian music. Subject contributes to the total scope of the project. Subject is not likely famous, even inside Christian music circles. The subject is likely included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic, such as an album by artist who themselves may be of a greater significance. Few readers outside the Christian music field or its fans may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article. Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of Christian music, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed. Topics included at this level include most practices and infrastructure of Christian music.
Specifically
Status Artists Albums
High  • Multi-Dove (excluding album, song, specialty (packaging, others) categories)
 • any Grammy winner
 • Biographical inclusion in general market reference sources
 • Foremost Christian artist in a musical genre
 • Grammy winner
 • RIAA certification Gold or higher
Mid  • Single Dove (same exclusions as above)
 • Multi-Dove (all categories)
 • Grammy nominee
 • Dove winner (excluding specialty (packaging, others) categories)
 • Grammy nominee
Low Others

Given the number and variety of articles with which this project shall be dealing, I believe that we should devote a good deal of attention in the short run to determining which of the articles we consider to be of greatest importance to the project. We now have a page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian music/Assessment/Top-importance articles where we can discuss which articles should receive top-importance ranking. Any and all input is more than welcome.

Requesting an assessment[edit]

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 (but above the following Assessment log section).

  • Lecrae - currently listed as mid-importance. Is not a Grammy winner, but he is indisputably the foremost artist in his genre (no, TobyMac doesn't count). Beyond that, he is one of the foremost artists in the Christian music scene, often named along with Smitty, TobyMac, and Chris Tomlin, and his latest album went No. 1 on Billboard.--¿3family6 contribs 14:21, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Gravity (Lecrae album) - the article was just assessed, but I feel the low importance listing is wrong. The album is a Grammy nominated award-winning album by the most prominent Christian hip hop artist and one of the most prominent artists right now in Christian music period. This album is known outside strictly Christian circles, receiving coverage from publications like Billboard, Complex and XXL, and reviews from AllHipHop and RapReviews.com. Within Christian circles it was highly anticipated and Rapzilla called it "the most important album in the history of Christian Hip-Hop."--¿3family6 contribs 15:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC) Yes check.svg Done Rated as a mid-importance Flofor15 (talk) 17:44, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Steve Bell (musician) (no major recent changes, but newly project-tagged) -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as Start Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 14:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
  • John Elefante -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as Start Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 13:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • DecembeRadioZeagler (talk) 17:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as B Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Deitiphobia (major overhaul, currently stub)Ryu Ike (talk) 02:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as B Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Jacob Moon - deleted a few days ago due to shaky notability, re-created by me yesterday. Should meet Project Music notability now, would appreciate Project Christian music opinion. A propos, I didn't create the previous version. Petersent (talk) 23:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done Change rating from B to Start Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Carolyn Arends - currently rated as Stub, does it qualify as Start? Petersent (talk) 23:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as Start Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Jon Bauer - currently unrated. Petersent (talk) 23:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as Start Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Amanda Falk - currently unrated. Petersent (talk) 01:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done Rated as Start Class -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Phil Wickham - I completely re-wrote this article some time ago. Today an editor removed the stub class, but I feel that the article is much improved and needs re-assesment. Thanks! Wikiwikikid (talk) 15:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC) - Yes check.svg Done - This is currently rated a C Class article. Tuxhedoh (talk) 04:37, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Made to Love should be at least "Start", because it is full of important information. Importance debatably higher. Also, please post suggestions on the Talk Page!
  • Almost There (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Toa Nidhiki05 00:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Christmas music would seem to have risen above Start Class. Maybe it's closer to a B now? Artaxerxes (talk) 15:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC) -- Yes check.svg Done B-class now.--¿3family6 contribs 17:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Assessment log[edit]

Christian music articles:
Index · Statistics · Log
The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

July 2, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

June 17, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

June 16, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 15, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 14, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 13, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

June 12, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

June 10, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 9, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 8, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 7, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 6, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

June 5, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 4, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

June 3, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

June 1, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 31, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 30, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 29, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

May 27, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 26, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 25, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 24, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 23, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 22, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

May 21, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 20, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • The Nelons (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

May 19, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 18, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 17, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

May 16, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 15, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 14, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 13, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • 12 Stones (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Low-Class (rev · t).

May 12, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 11, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 10, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 9, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

May 7, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 6, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 5, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

May 4, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 3, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

May 2, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

May 1, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

  • Glo (talk) removed. Quality rating was Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating was Low-Class (rev · t).

April 29, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 28, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 27, 2015[edit]

Renamed[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 25, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 24, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 23, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 22, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 21, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Quaker music (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

April 20, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 19, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Todd Dulaney (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

April 18, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Removed[edit]

April 17, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 16, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 15, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 14, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 13, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 12, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

  • Roland Utbult (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

April 11, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 10, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 9, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Assessed[edit]

April 8, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

April 7, 2015[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

Categories[edit]