Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Project overviewTasksCurationGuidesAwardsOur classicistsTalk page

The Curation and Assessment department assesses the quality of Wikipedia's classical Greece and Rome articles. Article quality ratings are used within Wikipedia, and this WikiProject, to recognise excellent contributions, identify topics in need of further work, and support the external Version 1.0 Editorial Team program.


Frequently asked questions (FAQ)[edit]

1. What is the purpose of the article ratings? 
The rating system allows us to monitor the quality of articles in our area, and prioritise editor time for working on these articles. It is also used by the Wikipedia 1.0 program for static releases of Wikipedia content. These ratings are intended for internal use within the project, and do not necessarily constitute an official rating in any meaningful sense.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{Classical Greece and Rome}} to the top of the article's talk page.
3. Who can assess articles? 
Any editor or member of the WikiProject, is free to add or change the rating of an article between stub, start, C and B classes. Editors do not need to be professional classicists nor members of this WikiProject to assess articles within this range of classes. However, quality assignments higher than B-class cannot be made outside of the formal review process; this is because the GA, A, and FA-class designations require significant attention to detail and consensus.
4. How do I rate an article? 
Select from the quality scale, after reviewing in detail, the level that best matches the state of the article. Then follow the #Assessment instructions to convey the rating onto the article, through the article's talk page project banner. Remember that quality ratings above B-class cannot be made unilaterally.
5. Can I request that someone else rate an article? 
Absolutely. Simply list it at #Requests for assessment below.
6. Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? 
Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we may be unable to leave a detailed rationale. 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. If you require written, detailed feedback on your article, you may like to consider using peer review.
7. What if I don't agree with a rating? 
List it at #Requests for assessment and someone else will evaluate the article. Or, ask the original reviewer or any other member of the project to re-rate the article.
8. Aren't the ratings subjective? 
Yes, they are somewhat subjective, 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 Talk page.


Quality ratings:
Featured article FA  A-Class article A   GA  B-Class article B 
C-Class article C  Start-Class article Start  Stub-Class article Stub  Featured list FL 
 List  Featured media FM   NA   
Importance ratings:
 Top   High   Mid   Low 
 Bottom   NA     
Unassessed categories:
Unknown importance Unknown quality

As do most WikiProjects, we assess our articles for Quality and Importance. Quality designations are made according to a set of generally-accepted criteria, which are summarised below. Lower quality designations are conferred by individual project members. Higher quality designations are conferred once the article has passed a peer review by a group of Classics editors (for A-Class articleA-class status) or the relevant Wikipedia-wide assessment systems (for Good articleGA-class or Featured articleFA-class status).

Requests for assessment of an article into B-class or any lower rank may be made at #Requests for assessment. You should not assess an article you have made substantial contributions to, because – self-evidently – it is less likely you will be able to fairly and accurately judge your own work.

It is vital that people do not take these assessments personally. We each have our own opinions of the priorities of the objective criteria for a perfect article. Different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area.

Criteria for assessing quality on prose articles
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
Featured article FA The article meets all the featured article criteria. Featured article candidacy (FAC) Euclidean algorithm (as of May 2009)
Suggestions for moving rating upwards: Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. Peer review may help.
A-Class article A The article meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review at WT:CGR. Late Roman army (as of September 2008)
Suggestions for moving rating upwards: 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.
GA The article meets all the Good article criteria and has been externally reviewed against them. Good article nomination Cynicism (as of May 2010)
Suggestions for moving rating upwards: A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be 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.
B The article is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. Individual review Battle of Utica (203 BC)) (as of November 2010)
Suggestions for moving rating upwards: Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.
C The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. It meets B1 or B2 and all of B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review Mark Antony (as of November 2010)
Suggestions for moving rating upwards: Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation.
Start A classics article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources. Individual review Ancient Greek comedy (as of November 2010)
Suggestions for moving rating upwards: Any editing or additional material will be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be prioritised. Bear in mind that some topics may simply not have anything more than rudimentary data available on them – for example, many topics from the early Roman Republic and the Roman Kingdom.
Stub A very basic description of a topic clearly related to classics. Individual review Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (consul 133 BC) (as of February 2010)
See also: Category:Classical Greece and Rome articles by quality and the generic criteria.

Assessments of importance do not, and should not, reflect the importance of the subject within academia or classical studies, but rather its importance to an average reader with no background in the subject.

Requests for assessment[edit]

Articles that are unassessed are automatically indexed at Category:Unassessed Classical Greece and Rome articles. In addition, any editor may explicitly, directly request assessment of their classics article by a project member.

  • Requests for assessment of an article that you expect to be assessed into the Stub-Class article Stub, Start-Class article Start, C-Class article C, or B-Class article B classes can be listed in this section.
  • Requests for assessment of an article into the Good article GA or Featured article FA classes should be listed, respectively, at Good article candidates (GAC) and Featured article candidates (FAC) respectively; if those processes confer their associated designation onto your article, you may then update the article's talk page banner with the new class.
  • If you wish your article to be assessed against the A-Class article A class criteria, please list it at WT:CGR for assessment.

Old requests for assessment can be browsed in the page history.

Request quality and importance assessment

  1. Keynsham Roman Villa Review for C class please? Fatcat2 (talk) 13:34, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  2. Climate of Ancient Rome Review for C class please? Fatcat2 (talk) 14:12, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  3. Echo and Narcissus This article seems as though it is of greater importance than listed. Icedog68 (talk) 19:14, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

6. Titus Calpurnius Siculus. Hi - I have revamped the article entirely. It was previously cut and pasted from the 11th Edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica. It would be great if someone might consider giving it an upgrade! Thanks CHRM2 (talk) 11:41, 4 October 2015 (UTC) (Charles)

A-Class Review[edit]

A-Class Candidate icon (A_candidate.svg from Wikimedia Commons)
As described above, A-Class status is conferred on an article by recommendation of at least two reviewers. Reviewers are usually members of the WikiProject. Any editor may propose an article for A-Class Review, which is conducted on the project talk page, WT:CGR. Recommendations for promotion must exceed recommendations against promotion by a margin of at least 2:1; unanimous recommendations are preferred. Reviewers must read the article in its entirety, scrutinise its contents carefully and in detail, and thoughtfully compare the article to the A-Class assessment criteria. Reviewers are expected to post their assessment, with complete comments and an explanation, onto the review page; they are also expected to afford the nominator an appropriate period of time in which to address rectifiable concerns. Reviews will be closed by an uninvolved project member after a suitable period of time; in the case of successful nominations, A-Class status will be conferred onto the article at this time.

A-Class Reviews are conducted using {{WPCGR/ACR}}. To start a new A-Class Review with the template automatically filled in, click the button below:

Nominate your article for A-Class status


Curation overview[edit]

[log][by quality][by importance]


The following task queues are backlogged and require the attention of experienced, knowledgeable Wikipedians. Tasks in the queue do not need to be cleared by a project member or somebody with knowledge in Classics, though help is readily available to Wikipedians with expertise that does not extend to Ancient Greece and Rome who require it.

Backlog!Need assessed by quality 
2,243 articles in total
Backlog!Need assessed by importance 
2,163 articles in total
Backlog!WikiWork Ω rating held under 5.0 
Currently rated 5.11