Wikipedia:WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan/Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to the assessment department of the Gilbert and Sullivan WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Gilbert and Sullivan and related articles. 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 recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.
The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{G&S-project}} talk page project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Gilbert and Sullivan articles by quality and Category:Gilbert and Sullivan articles by importance.
Contents |
[edit] Frequently asked questions
- How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
- Just add {{G&S-project}} 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 Gilbert and Sullivan WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. To preserve objectivity is generally preferred that you do not rate articles to which you have made a substantial contribution.
- 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.
- 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 WP:1.0 have 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?
- Put the articles you are concerned about on your watch list.
- 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 ask them on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan, or contact one of the other members directly.
[edit] Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{G&S-project}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):
- {{G&S-project| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter:
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- Cat (adds articles to Category:Category-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- Template (adds articles to Category:Template-Class Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- NA (for pages, such as project pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article Gilbert and Sullivan pages)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Gilbert and Sullivan articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
The following values may be used for the importance parameter:
- Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
- Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Gilbert and Sullivan articles)
The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. Articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Gilbert and Sullivan articles. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.
[edit] Quality scale
| Label | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editor's experience | Example |
 FA{{FA-Class}} |
Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. | Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. | No further editing is necessary unless new published information has come to light; but further improvements to the text are often possible. | Supernova (as of February 2007) |
| A {{A-Class}} |
Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. | Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points. | Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage. | Durian (as of March 2007) |
 GA{{GA-Class}} |
The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise good. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but having completed the Good article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class. | Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, excessive information. Adequate for most purposes, but other encyclopedias could do a better job. | Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time. | International Space Station (as of February 2007) |
| B {{B-Class}} |
Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a completed article. Nonetheless, it has significant gaps or missing elements or references, needs substantial editing for English language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles. | Useful to many, but not all, readers. A casual reader flipping through articles would feel that they generally understood the topic, but a serious student or researcher trying to use the material would have trouble doing so, or would risk error in derivative work. | Considerable editing is still needed, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors. Articles for which cleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. | Munich air disaster (as of May 2006) has a lot of helpful material but contains too many lists, and needs more prose content & references. |
| Start {{Start-Class}} |
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:
|
Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded. | Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an article cleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage. | Real analysis (as of November 2006) |
| Stub {{Stub-Class}} |
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. | Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition. | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. | Coffee table book (as of July 2005) |
[edit] Importance scale
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 literature.
| Label | Criteria | Examples |
| Top | Subject is a "core" topic for anyone wanting to know about Gilbert and Sullivan. Any good encyclopedia should have an excellent article on this subject. Extremely high probability that non-G&S specialists will be looking at this article. | Gilbert and Sullivan W. S. Gilbert Arthur Sullivan The Mikado |
| High | Subject is highly important in the G&S field, but somewhat less important to non-specialists. | Iolanthe D'Oyly Carte Opera Company Rutland Barrington |
| Mid | Subject is notable or significant within the broad G&S community, but not particularly well known or important outside of it. | The Grand Duke The Rose of Persia Peter Pratt |
| Low | Subject is of importance only to G&S specialists. | The Sapphire Necklace Princess Toto Nellie Briercliffe |
[edit] Requesting an assessment
Requests for assessments can be placed here.
The Sapphire Necklace - Seems to have all relevant information, making the "Start" class somewhat odd. Adam Cuerden talk 00:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Ages Ago - Spin-off from the W. S. Gilbert article that probably won't receive much work for a while - It's mainly just to let information be removed from the main article - but is reasonably useful it itself. Adam Cuerden talk 23:59, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that this is a Start with Low priority. -- Ssilvers 00:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- As it happens, I put that up just as Marc rated it, I think, then never got around to removing it. Have struck it out now. Adam Cuerden talk 11:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Short, sharp shock. I can't believe this has an article. Well, more of an expansded disambig. page. Adam Cuerden talk 21:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that this is a Start with Low priority. -- Ssilvers 00:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Right'n. That's two of us, then. Adam Cuerden talk 11:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Nancy McIntosh - Importance level right? Adam Cuerden talk 04:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- No, she is definitely low. Peter Pratt is mid. She only appeared in one G&S show. -- Ssilvers 16:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- She's not a notable performer, but her relationship to Gilbert forms a large part of any biographical treatment of the later years of Gilbert's life, making her effectively a spin-off article to a top importance article (Indeed, I'm treating her article as the prototype for the next W. S. Gilbert expansion. - hence making it effectively a sub-page to it.) But it really doesn't matter: rating is only a rough guide. Adam Cuerden talk 20:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
