Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Sweden/Assessment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to theassessment departmentofWikiProject Sweden,which focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia'sSweden-related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in theWP:1.0programme.

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the{{WikiProject Sweden}}project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories ofCategory:Sweden articles by qualityandCategory:Sweden articles by importance,which serve as the foundation for anautomatically generated worklist.

FAQ

[edit]
See also thegeneral 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 theWikipedia 1.0 programto 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{{WikiProject Sweden}}to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a{{WikiProject Sweden}}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 Sweden 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 thequality scaleand select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow theinstructionsbelow to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page.
6. Can I request that someone else rate an article?
Of course; to do so, please list it in thesection for assessment requestsbelow.
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?
People atWikipedia:Peer Reviewcan conduct a more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there, or ask for comments on themain project discussion page.
9. What if I don't agree with a rating?
You can list it in thesection for assessment requestsbelow, and someone will take a look at it. Alternately, you can ask any member of the project to rate the article again.
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 themain project discussion page.

Instructions

[edit]

An article's assessment is generated from theclassandimportanceparameters in the{{WikiProject Sweden}}project banner on its talk page (see thetemplate pagefor more details on the exact syntax):

{{WPSweden| class=??? | importance=??? |...}}

The following values for theclassparameter may be used:

The following values for theimportanceparameter may be used:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed inCategory:Unassessed Sweden articlesand articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed inCategory:Unknown-importance Sweden articles.The class and importance should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Quality scale

[edit]
WikiProject content 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]
Status Meaning of Status
Top This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information.
High This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.
Mid This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Low This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.

Statistics

[edit]

Current status

[edit]
Sweden articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 1 4 14 19
FL 5 6 27 38
A 2 2
GA 2 10 38 153 2 205
B 16 80 157 359 30 642
C 13 113 581 2,161 1 108 2,977
Start 1 164 1,890 12,690 2 716 15,463
Stub 1,321 23,372 38 2,263 26,994
List 2 19 236 1,250 101 217 1,825
Category 15,888 15,888
Disambig 298 298
File 131 131
Portal 7 7
Project 14 14
Redirect 3 32 528 1,445 2,008
Template 1,592 1,592
NA 9 9
Other 72 72
Assessed 34 395 4,267 40,554 19,598 3,336 68,184
Unassessed 1 8 9
Total 34 395 4,267 40,555 19,598 3,344 68,193
WikiWork factors(?) ω =253,309 Ω =5.48


Requests for assessment

[edit]

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 useWikipedia:Peer reviewinstead.

  1. Swedish orthography:Essentially a new page, translated from the Swedish version. The old "Swedish Orthography" page has been moved toSwedish Alpha bet.EAR47(talk)06:03, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Adolf Fredrik's Music School:Major update --Klättermusen(talk)17:54, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Håkan Andersson (ice hockey)- since the last assessment the article has been expanded and revised with such wonderful features as two images, birthdate, and a new section. Thank you,Rejectwater(talk)17:49, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I see that it is assessed as C-class for WPSweden, but B-class for two other projects. The length, referencing, illustrations and general "layout polish" should be enough for B-class. However, I hesitate somewhat to go from C to B because of some of the tone and content of the article. It's more written like a profile for a magazine (e.g. the quotations and some "trivia" -like info) than our typical slightly "drier" encyclopedic articles.Tomas e(talk)14:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Mörsil- The last time this article was assessed was in 2009 and since then it has been edited significantly. Has more references, has expanded with additional historical and cultural information. It is currently rated at stub class.
  5. Historical murders and executions in Stockholm- Assess, please. I feel like it belongs here. --lovkal(talk)20:55, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. IFK Kristianstad- Expanded from a stub to a full article with a lead, relevant sections and what free images I could find.BlueSwede92(talk)17:22, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  7. The Perfect World Foundation- It is probably a stub but any recognition and guidance would be useful. It is a useful article if cleaned up and expanded, so I have addressed the Style and Tone label by rewriting the obvious Swedish translation.Exnihil(talk):Ex nihil (talk)13:55, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Carl Wiman- Major revamp. Added life story and achievements.ViriatoLusitano(talk)20:56, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Valfrid Palmgren- Expanded significantly with translation and pictures from the Swedish article. Currently rated start class.flod logic(talk)09:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Calla Curman- Expanded somewhat with translation from Swedish article and more pictures. Currently rated stub class.flod logic(talk)09:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Kilian Stobæus- Expanded with translation from Swedish article, currently rated stub class.flod logic(talk)09:55, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Ida EngvollRewrote Introduction to correct / clarify English. I made some assumptions and may have made mistakes. Please see Article Talk & Edit summaries. Thanks! Tack!Left Central(talk)20:47, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Things We Do for Love (The Sounds album)Created a new article for what was previously a redirect to the band's article.De728631(talk)17:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add new requests above

Log

[edit]

The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is availablehere.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Sweden/Assessment&oldid=1110810006"