Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City/Assessment

<Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City
New York City articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 1 11 26 57 95
FL 1 8 17 26
FM 70 70
GA 17 40 214 671 5 947
B 30 85 326 768 60 1,269
C 17 97 572 2,886 185 3,757
Start 2 120 812 9,682 1 989 11,606
Stub 10 468 4,738 1 1,278 6,495
List 3 10 54 425 1 7 500
Category 1 3,497 3,498
Disambig 1 1 32 34
File 158 158
Portal 76 76
Project 67 67
Redirect 1 13 151 1,456 1,621
Template 838 838
NA 1 1 4 2 8
Other 5 96 101
Assessed 70 376 2,496 19,405 6,295 2,524 31,166
Unassessed 11 2 680 693
Total 70 376 2,496 19,416 6,297 3,204 31,859
WikiWork factors(?) ω =117,699 Ω =4.87
Assessment links

Welcome to theassessment departmentof the WikiProject New York City! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's New York City articles. While much of the work is done in conjunction with theWP:1.0program, 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{{WikiProject New York City}}project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories ofCategory:New York City articles by quality,Category:New York City articles by importance,Category:New York City articles needing attention.The quality and importance ratings serve as the foundation for anautomatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questions

edit
How can I get my article rated?
As a member of the WikiProject New York City, you can do it yourself. If you are unsure, list it in therequesting an assessment sectionbelow.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of WikiProject New York City is free to add or change the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
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?
ContactWikipedia:WikiProject New York Citywho will handle it or assign the issue to someone. You may also list it for aPeer review.
What if I don't agree with a rating?
Relist it as a request or contactWikipedia:WikiProject New York Citywho will handle it or assign the issue to someone.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on theimportance 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!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department, or to contact theWikipedia:WikiProject New York Citydirectly.

Instructions

edit

An article's assessment is generated from theclassandimportanceparameters in the{{WikiProject New York City}}project banner on its talk page. You can learn the syntax by looking at the talk pages in edit mode and by reading the info below.

This is the rating syntax (ratings and dates are samples, change to what applies to the article in question):

{{WikiProject New York City}}
  • displays the default banner, showing the project info and only??? for the quality and importance parameters.
{{WikiProject New York City|class=FA|importance=Top}}
  • all assessed articles should have quality and importance filled in. Leaving the other parameters off does not hurt anything.
{{WikiProject New York City|class=Start|importance=Mid|attention=yes}}
  • if an article needs immediate attention, add the attention tag and please leave talk notes as to why. "yes" is the only valid parameter here. If it doesn't need attention, leave the parameter off.

The following values may be used for theclassparameter:

Articles for which a valid class and/or importance is not provided are listed inCategory:Unassessed New York City articles.The class should be assigned according to thequality scalebelow.

The following values may be used for theimportanceparameter:

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set toNA,and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to theimportance scalebelow.

Quality scale

edit

Note: A B-class article should have at least one reference.

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
FA The article has attainedfeatured articlestatus by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers fromWP:Featured article candidates.
More detailed criteria
The article meets thefeatured article criteria:

Afeatured articleexemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting thepolicies regarding contentfor all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written:its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive:it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. well-researched:it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims areverifiableagainst high-qualityreliable sourcesand are supported by inline citationswhere appropriate;
    4. neutral:it presents viewsfairly and without bias;
    5. stable:it is not subject to ongoingedit warsand its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and
    6. compliant withWikipedia's copyright policyand free ofplagiarismortoo-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows thestyle guidelines,including the provision of:
    1. a lead:a conciselead sectionthat summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure:a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchicalsection headings;and
    3. consistent citations:where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—seeciting sourcesfor suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media.It hasimagesand other media, where appropriate, with succinctcaptionsandacceptable copyright status.Images follow theimage use policy.Non-freeimages or media must satisfy thecriteria for inclusion of non-free contentandbe labeled accordingly.
  4. Length.It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and usessummary stylewhere appropriate.
 Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. Cleopatra
(as of June 2018)
FL The article has attainedfeatured liststatus by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers fromWP:Featured list candidates.
More detailed criteria
The article meets thefeatured list criteria:
  1. Prose.It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead.It has an engagingleadthat introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure.It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful,sectionheadings andtable sortfacilities.
  5. Style.It complies with theManual of Styleand its supplementary pages.
  6. Stability.It is not the subject of ongoingedit warsand its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.
 Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items. No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events
(as of May 2018)
A The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
More detailed criteria
The article meets theA-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described inWikipedia:Article development.It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as afeatured article candidate.See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g.WikiProject Military history).
 Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving.WP:Peer reviewmay help. Battle of Nam River
(as of June 2014)
GA The article meetsallof thegood article criteria,and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers fromWP:Good article nominations.
More detailed criteria
Agood articleis:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, andunderstandable to an appropriately broad audience;spelling and grammar are correct;and
    2. it complies with theManual of Styleguidelines forlead sections,layout,words to watch,fiction,andlist incorporation.
  2. Verifiablewithno original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance withthe layout style guideline;
    2. reliable sourcesarecited inline.All content thatcould reasonably be challenged,except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
    3. it containsno original research;and
    4. it contains nocopyright violationsorplagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses themain aspectsof the topic;and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (seesummary style).
  4. Neutral:it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable:it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoingedit waror content dispute.
  6. Illustrated,if possible, bymediasuch asimages,video,oraudio:
    1. media aretaggedwith theircopyright statuses,andvalid non-free use rationalesare provided fornon-free content;and
    2. media arerelevantto the topic, and havesuitable captions.
 Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existingfeatured articleon a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. Discovery of the neutron
(as of April 2019)
B The article meetsallof theB-Class criteria.It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reachgood article standards.
More detailed criteria
  1. The article issuitably referenced,withinline citations.It hasreliable sources,and any important or controversial material which islikely to be challengedis cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of<ref> tagsandcitation templatessuch as{{cite web}}is optional.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for anA-Class article,although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
  3. The article has a defined structure.Content should be organized into groups of related material, including alead sectionand all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written.The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to beof the standard of featured articles.TheManual of Styledoes not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, aninfoboxetc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
  6. The article presents its content in anappropriately understandable way.It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background andtechnical terms should be explained or avoidedwhere possible.
 Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with theManual of Styleand relatedstyle guidelines. Psychology
(as of January 2024)
C The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantialcleanup.
More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
 Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solvecleanupproblems. Wing
(as of June 2018)
Start An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
  • A 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
 Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. Providing references toreliable sourcesshould come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. Ball
(as of September 2014)
Stub A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. Lineage (anthropology)
(as of December 2014)
List Meets the criteria of astand-alone listorset index article,which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area. There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader. Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized. List of literary movements

Importance scale

edit

The criteria used for rating article importance arenotmeant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of theaveragereader 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 greaterpopularnotability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of – for example – military history. Importance does not equate to quality; afeatured articlecould rate 'mid' on importance.

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. Rate international region/country-specific articles from the perspective of someone from that region.

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Subject is a "core" or "key" topic for New York City, or is generally notable to the public at large.

High Subject is notable in a significant and important way within the field of New York City, but not necessarily outside it.

Mid Subject contributes to the total subject of the New York City WikiProject. Subject may not necessarily be famous. Many articles will be in this eclass.

Low Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within the field of New York City, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic.

  • Places
  • People
    • Notable individuals withtangentialconnections to NYC (Alan Greenspan)
    • Individual seasons of NYC sports teams (excl. notable exceptions)
    • Products or items invented/produced in NYC, butnot significantto the city as a whole (Edo Aircraft Corporation)
  • Events
    • Events in NYC with little significance to the city overall. (WrestleMania X)
  • Other
    • Products/items/media created in NYC butnotsignificant to the city

Requesting an assessment or re-assessment

edit

To submit an article for assessment or inclusion in WikiProject NYC, please add it tothe request list.

Articles may be submitted or re-submitted at any time. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use thepeer review department instead.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_York_City/Assessment&oldid=1062916611"