Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aviation WikiProject
General information Main project page talk Announcements and open tasks talk  → Articles needing attention talk Assessment department talk Collaboration department talk Review department talk Showcase  → Featured picture gallery talk Portals
Project organization Members talk Project banner talk Outreach department talk  → Current newsletter Project category talk
Guidelines Infobox templates  → Aircraft infobox talk  → Airport infobox talk  → Airline infobox talk Categories Featured article advice
Sub projects Aircraft project talk Airlines project talk  → Defunct Airlines project talk Airports project talk Gliding project talk Red Bull Air Race project talk
Task forces Rotorcraft talk Glider talk Military aviation talk
edit · changes

Welcome to the assessment department of the Aviation WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's aviation articles. While much of the work is (may in the future be) 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 {{WPAVIATION}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Aviation articles by quality, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The running totals for aviation assessments are shown in the table below, also found here, and the overall project is found at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index.

[edit] Frequently asked questions

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 {{WPAVIATION}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

3. Someone put a {{WPAVIATION}} 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 talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).

4. Who can assess articles? 

Any member of the Aviation WikiProject 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. Can I request that someone else rate an article? 

Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.

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. Where can I get more comments about an article? 

The review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for peer review there.

9. 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.

10. 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!

11. What if I have a question not listed here? 

If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page, or contact a project member directly.

[edit] Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameters in the {{WPAVIATION}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{WPAVIATION
|class=
}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class aviation articles)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class aviation articles)
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class aviation articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class aviation articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class aviation articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class aviation articles)
• NA (for templates, images, categories, disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article aviation pages)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed aviation articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

[edit] Quality scale

Class	Criteria	Formal process	Example
FA	Reserved for articles that meet the featured article criteria and have received featured article status after community review.	Featured article candidates	Battle of Edson's Ridge (as of January 2007)
A	Reserved for articles that have received A-Class status after review by the project. Such articles are expected to largely meet the featured article criteria, and must be comprehensive, accurate, well-sourced, and decently-written; however, they may require some further copyediting.	Requests for A-Class status	Operation Linebacker II (as of January 2007)
GA	Reserved for articles that meet the good article criteria and have received good article status.	Good article nominations	15th Marine Expeditionary Unit (as of January 2007)
B	The article meets the following five criteria: It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. It is free from major grammatical errors. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.	May be assigned by any reviewer A checklist is available through {{WPAVIATION}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details); the checklist generates Category:B-Class aviation articles needing review (for current B-Class articles that may not meet all the criteria) and Category:Potential B-Class aviation articles (for below-B-Class articles that meet all five)	F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet (as of March 2007)
Start	The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element; it has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following: A particularly useful picture or graphic Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article	May be assigned by any reviewer	1st Battalion 2nd Marines (as of January 2007)
Stub	The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible.	May be assigned by any reviewer	16th Infantry Regiment (South Korea) (as of January 2007)

[edit] Statistics

[edit] Current stats

Aviation WikiProject assessment statistics Aviation articles Importance None Total Quality FA 6 6 A 4 4 GA 20 20 B 516 516 Start 1756 1756 Stub 5632 5632 Assessed 7934 7934 Unassessed 3770 3770 Total 11704 11704 worklist • log • category

[edit] Task force statistics

Aircraft WikiProject assessment statistics Aircraft articles Importance None Total Quality FA 2 2 A 4 4 GA 3 3 B 352 352 Start 774 774 Stub 546 546 Assessed 1681 1681 Unassessed 1006 1006 Total 2687 2687 worklist • log • category	Airline WikiProject assessment statistics Airline articles Importance None Total Quality FA 1 1 A GA B 23 23 Start 258 258 Stub 413 413 Assessed 695 695 Unassessed 971 971 Total 1666 1666 worklist • log • category	Airport WikiProject assessment statistics Airport articles Importance None Total Quality FA 1 1 A GA 3 3 B 83 83 Start 444 444 Stub 4357 4357 Assessed 4888 4888 Unassessed 1356 1356 Total 6244 6244 worklist • log • category
Military aviation task force assessment statistics Military aviation articles Importance None Total Quality FA 13 13 A 10 10 GA 7 7 B 418 418 Start 1409 1409 Stub 1109 1109 Assessed 2966 2966 Unassessed 0 0 Total 2966 2966 worklist • log • category	Rotorcraft task force assessment statistics Rotorcraft articles Importance None Total Quality FA A GA B 9 9 Start 92 92 Stub 70 70 Assessed 171 171 Unassessed 3 3 Total 174 174 worklist • log • category	Gliding WikiProject assessment statistics Gliding articles Importance None Total Quality FA 1 1 A GA B 3 3 Start 21 21 Stub 27 27 Assessed 52 52 Unassessed 1 1 Total 53 53 worklist • log • category
Glider task force assessment statistics Glider articles Importance None Total Quality FA A GA B Start 36 36 Stub 8 8 Assessed 44 44 Unassessed 0 0 Total 44 44 worklist • log • category	Red Bull Air Race World Series WikiProject assessment statistics Red Bull Air Race World Series articles Importance None Total Quality FA A GA B Start 14 14 Stub 6 6 Assessed 20 20 Unassessed 0 0 Total 20 20 worklist • log • category	Defunct Airlines WikiProject assessment statistics Defunct Airlines articles Importance None Total Quality FA A GA B Start 5 5 Stub 17 17 Assessed 22 22 Unassessed 0 0 Total 22 22 worklist • log • category

[edit] Requesting an assessment

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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the WikiProject Review department instead.

• Harmon Trophy - assessed B-class, meets all 5 criteria. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 21:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
• Kalamazoo-Battle Creek International Airport - assessed Start-class Wexcan 17:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• easyJet -- Requesting assessment -- Wexcan 15:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aviation Assessment log (updated by bot)

[edit] Airline Assessment log (updated by bot)

[edit] Airport Assessment log (updated by bot)

The log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available here. Unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.