Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Assessment

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

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Comics! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Comics 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 recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Comics}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Comics articles by quality and Category:Comics articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questions[edit]

See also the general assessment FAQ
1. What is the purpose of the article ratings? 
The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{WikiProject Comics}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Comics}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. 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 project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
4. Who can assess articles? 
Any member of WikiProject Comics 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.
5. How do I rate an article? 
Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions 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.
6. Where can I get more comments about my article? 
The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
7. 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.
8. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
9. Aren't the ratings subjective? 
Yes, they are somewhat subjective (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!
10. How can I keep track of changes in article ratings? 
A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the statistics may be more accessible.
11. What if I have a question not listed here? 
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.


Quality assessment[edit]

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

{{WikiProject Comics|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 Comics articles) Featured article FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Comics articles) A-Class article A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Comics articles)  GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Comics articles) B-Class article B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Comics articles) C-Class article C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Comics articles) Start-Class article Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Comics articles) Stub-Class article Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Comics articles) Featured list FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Comics 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 Comics articles) Wikipedia Book Book 
Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Comics articles) Category page Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Comics articles) Disambiguation page Disambig 
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Comics articles)  Draft 
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Comics articles)  File 
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Comics articles) Redirect page Redirect 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Comics articles)  Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Comics articles)  Project 
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Comics articles)  Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Comics articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Comics articles)  ??? 

Quality scale[edit]

The scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

These criteria apply to general-content articles. The manual of Style guide provides additional sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.

Each comics-related article has its assessment included within the {{WikiProject Comics}} template, such as {{WikiProject Comics|class=B}}. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Comics articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.

Importance assessment[edit]

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

{{WikiProject Comics|importance=???}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project:

Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Comics articles)  Top 
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Comics articles)  High 
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Comics articles)  Mid 
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Comics articles)  Low 
Bottom (adds articles to Category:Bottom-importance Comics articles)  Bottom 
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Comics articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Comics articles)  ??? 

The importance parameter should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Importance scale[edit]

The criteria used for rating article importance 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). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Comics.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.

Requesting an assessment[edit]

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for it, please feel free to list it below. To discuss the ratings methods or raise issues with similar articles rated differently, please use the talk page. NOTE: This is only to rate the article on quality - you may or may not get feedback on the article. If you desire a review, use the WP:COMICS peer review process or the regular peer review process. If you assess an article, please strike it off using <s>Strike-through text</s> and note your rating here so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Thanks!

Seeking an A-class rating? We suggest you submit it for a Peer Review to allow us more time to respond and review. Be sure to first read what qualifies as an A rating before doing so though.

Past assessments are located here. If you delete a striked-through article from the list, please remember to put it in the archive.

Add new requests at the bottom.

  1. Tintin in the Land of the Soviets, as of 04 January 2011.
  2. Tintin in the Congo, as of 09 January 2011.
  3. Nocturne (comics)
  4. Constantine (film) - Requesting re-assessment of this article currently rated as C-Class. Any tips on raising it's status further would be appreciated. Thanks. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ 17:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  5. Hellblazer- Really just want to see if what I've done is an improvement or a ruination, and what needs done further to get it even further. Cheers Bennydigital (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
  6. Weathercraft by Jim Woodring (looking to get it bumped up at least to a B-rating) Acidtoyman (talk) 04:39, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
  7. Paying For It by Chester Brown Acidtoyman (talk) 07:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC) Requesting re-assessment (currently a C; now much improved) CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 12:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
  8. Alexander George Gurney as of 9 July 2011 (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
  9. Bluey and Curley as of 9 July 2011 (talk) 12:49, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
  10. Norman Hetherington as of 16 July 2011 (talk) 04:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  11. Small Saves as of 22 Oct 2011 Requesting reassessment Dkendr (talk) 02:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
  12. Denis Gifford Requesting re-assessment of article currently ranked as C-class in Wikiproject comics, changed quite a lot plus comigraphy/ comic writings list page. talk 22:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
  13. Judge Dredd This article has changed quite a bit since it was rated C-class. Hoping for a B. Richard75 (talk) 23:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
  14. Red Hood and the Outlaws This article was created from parts of Jason Todd and Starfire, I'm hoping for some guidelines on how to improve it. Charliefr99 (talk) 02:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
  15. Louis Riel (comics) : the article has been thoroughly rewritten and expanded, lots of sources. Also, it is a bestseller and award-winner, so I think its importance should be reevaluated as well. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 06:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
    passed Featured article FA CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 06:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
  16. Canadian comics Has undergone peer review, but not reassessment, since being rewritten from scratch and greatly expanded (originally 14kb, now 72kb), and thoroughly sourced. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 11:03, 23 February 2012 (UTC) Has been assessed as GA. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 00:50, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
  17. Markosia Still not of great quality, but there has been an info box added and a logo. Currently ranked as a stub Mwheatley1990 (talk) 16:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  18. Billy DeBeck Fully rewritten, reorganized, greatly expanded (from about 10kb to 20kb. I think it's reasonably complete. I'm not aware of any important parts missing), fully reffed. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 01:18, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
    assessed as Good article GA CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 06:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
  19. The Avengers (2012 film) - The highest grossing superhero film of all time should not be "bottom importance".Richiekim (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
  20. X-Men: First Class Requesting a B-class assessment from a member due to a GA nomination. Jhenderson 777 17:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
  21. John Wagner - previously assessed as "start" class and failed "B" class for not enough inline cites. I've given it a thorough rewrite with plenty of refs. --Nicknack009 (talk) 05:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
  22. Wonder Woman - Requesting assessment for "Good Article" rating. Article is currently rated B class.
  23. Near Death (comics)- I think I've taken this past "start" Argento Surfer (talk) 21:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
  24. Mind MGMT - Argento Surfer (talk) 20:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
  25. Streamline (comics) Requesting a C-class Bugsysiegel71 (talk) 01:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
  26. Todd McFarlane's Spawn: The Video Game. Currently stub. Was completely rewritten. Bergakungen91 (talk) 10:23, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
  27. Blackhawk (DC Comics) Requesting a reassessment after a comprehensive ground-up rewrite (23kb to 56kb). Hoping for at least a B, if not higher. DoctorSivana (talk) 22:34, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
  28. The Amazing Spider-Man (2012 film): Requesting a A-Class assessment. Jhenderson 777 20:50, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  29. Captain Carrot and His Amazing Zoo Crew! – I moved it from Start-class to C-class, but someone with expertise in Comics assessment should do the B-class review. Senator2029 ➔ “Talk” 09:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
  30. Symkaria - was a stub, information has been added. Requesting start status. Article up for deletion.
  31. Transia - was a stub, information has been added. Requesting start status. Article up for deletion.
  32. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. – Article appears to have more than enough references and covers it topic with enough accuracy to be assessed for grade B.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 21:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
  33. Norman Osborn - Requesting reassessment for a C-list article to be upgraded to B-list. I believe we've addressed the previously outstanding criterion of citations. Plus, it's been rewritten to address grammatical errors and structural problems. --Downthewikiwormhole (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
  34. Marvel vs. Capcom 2: New Age of Heroes - Requesting reassessment following article overhaul. Wani (talk) 16:14, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  35. Titania (Marvel Comics) is currently at Start-Class. I've gone through it for a few days and would like a reassessment (hoping for at least a B!) -SHODAN (talk) 19:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  36. DC Comics Graphic Novel Collection - Requesting an initial assessment so that the necessary improvements can be made.
  37. Three Thieves (graphic novel series) - Requesting assessment because it hasn't been assessed, and the article is halfway through completion. Also, is no longer a stub by far. L3X1 Complaints Desk 17:45, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
  38. ODY-C - It used to be three sentences long. Now it is not. --Mooeena (talk) 03:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
  39. "Dennis Hopeless" - Was told to add more biographical details to get a higher grade, so I added a personal section with information about his wife and children. Have kept the page updated with current work. OffensiveName (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  40. Serbian comics - rewritten from scratch in 2016, polished recently.WimbledonGreen (talk) 21:27, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
  41. Hyperion (comics) - extensively reformatted, trimmed a lot of information. Namenamenamenamename (talk) 02:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
  42. Squadron Supreme - It hasn't been evaluated since 2007, as far as I can tell? It has changed so much since 2007. Namenamenamenamename (talk) 02:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
  43. Galactus - Page has not been assessed in some time and I don't believe the indicated disqualification against B status (referencing and citation criterion not met) applies.Mobb One (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
  44. Aventuras en el mundo del futuro - hoping a rewrite brings it up to C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 04:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
  45. Small Saves - since its last assessment, there has been a detailed, independent article published that talks about the comic and the artist in more detail than any previous citation. I've incorporated it in, and gone over the article generally. I think this gets it to a C-class (substantial but is still missing important content) but not futher, because there is enough information but there is a lack of citations for the description of the comic's subject matter. HenryCrun15 (talk) 22:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Incorrectly assessed pages[edit]

Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Comics articles and Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Comics articles list pages which have been incorrectly assessed. Reasons for this include:

  • Invoked review parameter when the associated subpage doesn't exist, or missing review parameter it when it does
  • Invalid combination of review status and assessment class
  • Link to a portal subpage that doesn't exist
  • Use of a deprecated parameter (e.g. portal)
  • Assessed as NA-importance when the page is in the article namespace
    • Disambig and Redirect articles should be rated as No for importance
  • Assessed as No-importance when the page is not in the article namespace
    • Templates, Categories, Images and Portals should be rated as NA for importance
  • Assessed as having an importance when the page is not in the article namespace
  • Use of a deprecated parameter (e.g. image)
    • Future class has been deprecated


Please feel free to add your name to this list if you would like to join the assessment team

  1. Emperor (talk · contribs) special interests: British comics as well as US work by British comics creators. Will do B-class assessments on request
  2. Fortdj33 (talk · contribs) special interests: Marvel titles (mainly Avengers), and toy tie-in such as G.I. Joe and Transformers
  3. Fram (talk · contribs)
  4. Hiding (talk · contribs)
  5. Homoaffectional (talk · contribs) special interests: obscure & recurring characters, LGBT characters in comics
  6. Luminum (talk · contribs) special interests: LGBT characters in comics, minor characters, X-Men franchise
  7. jmcgowan2 (talk · contribs)
  8. Ranger14451 (talk · contribs) special interests: Marvel


As of 12 November 2019, there are 23,131 articles within the scope of WikiProject Comics, of which 66 are featured. This makes up 0.39% of the articles on Wikipedia and 0.73% of featured articles and lists. Including non-article pages, such as talk pages, redirects, categories, etcetera, there are 46,183 pages in the project.

Comics article rating and assessment scheme
(NB: Listing, Log & Stats are updated on a daily basis by a bot)
Daily log of status changes
Current Statistics


The log has now grown too large to transclude. Please see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Comics articles by quality log for full details.