Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand/Assessment

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

Quality: FA-Class | A Class | GA-Class | B-Class | C-Class | Start-Class | Stub Class | Unassessed Importance: Top | High | Mid | Low | Unknown

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject New Zealand! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's New Zealand articles.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject New Zealand}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:New Zealand articles by quality and Category:New Zealand articles by importance.

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{WikiProject New Zealand}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
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 New Zealand WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Please add your name to the list of participants if you wish to assess articles on a regular basis.
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.
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.
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!
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.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

Instructions[edit]

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject New Zealand}} project banner on its talk page, and it produces the adjacent table:

{{WPNZ|class=|importance=}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed New Zealand articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale above, which is explained in further detail in the table below.

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

The importance parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and should be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

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 New Zealand.

Importance ratings reflect the perceived importance to WikiProject New Zealand, and often differ from the ratings in other WikiProjects. For example, Daniel Carter Beard is rated Top-importance in WikiProject Scouting, but not rated at all in WikiProject New Zealand (although Daniel Carter's beard potentially might be).

Status Template Meaning of Status
Top {{Top-Class}} This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information.
High {{High-Class}} This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.
Mid {{Mid-Class}} This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Low {{Low-Class}} This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.
None None This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed.

Requesting an assessment[edit]

  • Official Information Act 1982 - I've been trying to beat this into shape, aiming eventually for GA status. But I need other eyes on it to spot areas where more references or further information are needed. I am using Freedom of Information Act 2000 (UK) as a broad model for what should be included. --IdiotSavant (talk) 01:02, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Wellington City Archives – I created this and have referenced (I think) every source that's available, including undigitised press clippings from the Archives' own collection. Could use another opinion. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 06:04, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Participants[edit]

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

  1. Adabow (talk · contribs)
  2. Andrensath (talk · contribs)
  3. Avenue (talk · contribs)
  4. Ballofstring (talk · contribs)
  5. Capitolhill51 (talk · contribs)
  6. Dramatic (talk · contribs)
  7. Dushan Jugum (talk · contribs)
  8. Egghead06 (talk · contribs)
  9. ImperialismGo (talk · contribs)
  10. J947 (talk · contribs)
  11. Liveste (talk · contribs)
  12. NealeFamily (talk · contribs)
  13. nengscoz416 (talk · contribs)
  14. Nzv8fan (talk · contribs)
  15. Schwede66 (talk · contribs)
  16. Sheldybett (talk · contribs)
  17. Sir Anon (talk · contribs)
  18. Te Karere (talk · contribs)
  19. UltraZit (talk · contribs)
  20. Wallie (talk · contribs)
  21. Wiki9871434 (talk · contribs)
  22. wdd123 (talk · contribs)
  23. XLerate (talk · contribs)

Example assessments[edit]

To assess an article, paste one of the following onto the article's talk page.

Quality

  • {{WPNZ|class=FA}} - to rate an article at FA-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=A}} - to rate an article at A-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=GA}} - to rate an article at GA-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=B}} - to rate an article at B-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=C}} - to rate an article at C-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=Start}} - to rate an article at Start-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=Stub}} - to rate an article at Stub-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=List}} - to rate an article at List-Class
  • {{WPNZ|class=redir}} - to classify a redirect. (Importance rating not needed)
  • {{WPNZ|class=disambig}} - to classify a disambiguation page. (Importance rating not required)
  • {{WPNZ}} - to leave the article un-assessed.


Importance

  • {{WPNZ|importance=Top}} - to rate an article at Top importance
  • {{WPNZ|importance=High}} - to rate an article at High importance
  • {{WPNZ|importance=Mid}} - to rate an article at Mid importance
  • {{WPNZ|importance=Low}} - to rate an article at Low importance