Wikipedia:WikiProject Hazara/Assessment

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

WikiProject Hazara

WikiProject Hazara

|This project is a workgroup of WikiProject Hazara, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Hazara and Hazara-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.

General information (e · c)

Main Project Page
Notice board
Discussion board
Featured and good content


Manual of Style


Article requests
New articles
To do


Template:WikiProject Hazara
Project category

This page has been created to identify and assess articles related to the Hazara WikiProject. This worklist may also be used to identify key articles for use by the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team, who are working toward a set of articles suitable for release in print, CD, DVD, or some combination.

How to list articles[edit]

Use this page to identify articles related to Hazara people and to assess their priority and quality. Feel free to expand the list. When adding an article, please add the template {{WikiProject Hazara}} to the articles talk page if it is not already there. Thanks.


Need: The article's importance, regardless of its quality

Top Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopaedia
High Subject contributes a depth of knowledge
Mid Subject fills in more minor details
Low Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial

Quality: current article quality

Featured article FA Featured article
A-Class article A Article is well written, reasonably complete and referenced; possible featured article candidate.
Symbol support vote.svg GA This is a good article.
B We have a decent article, but it needs further editing.
Start Significant cleanup or expansion needed.
Stub Article is either a very short, or rough.

Gradings are discussed in detail below.

Quality scale[edit]

These are the detailed criteria per class/quality division, following the assessment scheme used by the Wikipedia V1.0 Editorial team.

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Importance scale[edit]

We recognize that importance is a relative term. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another. Any importance ratings applied by this project, only reflect the perceived importance to this project. The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather it should serve as a guideline for project participants to determine which article should receive more attention.

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Definition: Subject is a must-have for a concise print encyclopedia or other reference work on Afghanistan. High probability that non-Afghans would look this up.

Practical tip: these subjects just pop into your head when you think about Afghanistan and a specific field

High Definition: Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopaedia. Is reasonably expected to be included into more comprehensive printed encyclopaedia.

Practical tip: you know the subject and most likely would be able to recall it without looking at any sources

Mid Definition: Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Could only be included in a multi-volume encyclopaedia.

Practical tip: most likely you will recognize the subject if someone mentions it to you

Low Definition: Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial.

Practical tip: most likely you will not recognize the subject