Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/Assessment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcut

Article assessment involves determining the quality and importance of articles of interest to WikiProject Conservatism. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.The article review processes provide constructive criticism which is used by editors to improve articles. We're happy to assess your new article as well as developed articles.

Statistics

[edit]


Conservatism articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 3 11 15 20 49
FL 1 1
FM 42 42
A 1 1
GA 5 11 26 78 120
B 26 88 232 521 101 968
C 37 138 355 1,266 1 247 2,044
Start 15 92 449 2,303 652 3,511
Stub 12 81 856 312 1,261
List 2 7 28 101 4 142
Category 15 15
File 100 100
Portal 136 136
Redirect 2 4 11 69 120 206
Template 61 61
NA 1 6 7
Other 2 2
Assessed 90 363 1,198 5,222 477 1,316 8,666
Unassessed 3 13 24 40
Total 90 363 1,201 5,235 477 1,340 8,706
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 36,531 Ω = 4.58

Index · Statistics · Log

Request assessment

[edit]

To request an assessment of your new or developed article click here:

If you would like an outside opinion on a new quality and/or importance rating for your article, please feel free click the button. This will result in an assessment rating of Stub, Start, C or B.

Request assessment

Overview

[edit]

The assessment system used by the WikiProject Conservatism to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assess lists and similar non-prose articles.

Prose article List article
Stub The first stage of an article's evolution is called a stub. A stub is an extremely short article that provides a basic description of the topic at best; it includes very little meaningful content, and may be little more than a dictionary definition. At this stage, it is often impossible to determine whether the topic should be covered by a prose article or a list, so this assessment level is shared between the two scales.
Start List A stub that undergoes some development will progress to the next stage of article evolution. An article at this stage provides some meaningful content, but is typically incomplete and lacks adequate references, structure, and supporting materials. At this stage, it becomes possible to distinguish between prose articles and lists; depending on its form, an article at this level will be assessed as a Start-Class prose article or a List-Class list.
C As the article continues to develop, it will reach the C-Class level. At this stage, the article is reasonably structured and contains substantial content and supporting materials, but may still be incomplete or poorly referenced, but not both. As articles progress to this stage, the assessment process begins to take on a more structured form, and specific criteria are introduced against which articles are rated. The article meets at least one of the B-Class criteria.
B An article that reaches the B-Class level is complete in content and structure, adequately referenced, and includes reasonable supporting materials; overall, it provides a satisfactory encyclopedic presentation of the topic for the average reader, although it might not be written to the standard that would be expected by an expert. Articles at this stage commonly undergo peer review to solicit ideas for further improvement. B-Class is the final assessment level that can be reached without undergoing a formal review process, and is a reasonable goal for newer editors.
GA After reaching the B-Class level, an article may be submitted for assessment as a good article. Good articles must meet a set of criteria similar to those required for the B-Class assessment level, and must additionally undergo the formal good article review process.
A AL A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for the A-Class assessment level. An A-Class article presents a complete and thorough encyclopedic treatment of a subject, such as might be written by an expert in the field; the only deficiencies permissible at this level are minor issues of style or language. To receive an A-Class rating, a candidate article must undergo the formal A-Class review process. The A-Class rating is the highest assessment level that may be assigned by an individual WikiProject; higher assessment levels are granted only by Wikipedia-wide independent assessment processes.
FA FL The featured article and featured list ratings represent the pinnacle of article evolution and the best that Wikipedia has to offer; an article at this level is professional, outstanding, and represents a definitive source for encyclopedic information. Featured status is assigned only through a thorough independent review process; this process can be grueling for the unprepared, and editors are highly advised to submit articles for A-Class review prior to nominating them for featured status.
Importance scale

WikiProject article importance scheme
Importance Criteria Example
 Top Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to the Conservatism topic area. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within Conservatism. Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia. Subject is a candidate for {{Conservatism}}.
 High Subject is extremely notable within the Conservatism topic area, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Subject is a candidate for a country-specific sidebar e.g. {{Conservatism US}}.
 Mid Subject is only notable within the Conservatism topic area and has achieved notability in a particular place or area.
 Low Subject is of the lowest level of relevance or significance to Conservatism topic area.
 NA Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. Category:Conservatism
 ??? Subject importance has not yet been assessed. See: Category:Unknown-importance Conservatism articles

How to assess an article

[edit]
  • Assess the article using the quality and importance schemes above.
  • Once assessed add {{WikiProject Conservatism|class=|importance=}} to the Talk page with the correct parameters.
  • Edit the Talk page to add a comment about why you rated the article the way you did. Please sign and date your comment with ~~~~.
  • The Rater tool can assist with article assessment. Another tool is the Kingbotk plugin for AutoWikiBrowser.

See below for assessing specific quality types

Stub

Stubs are assessed using Individual Review, and the author is free to assess the article. If the article is assessed better than a stub but it has a stub template, remove the stub template(s) from the article. Currently there are no conservatism stub templates, identification of stubs is accomplished by setting class=stub in the banner. This categorizes article talk pages into Category:Stub-Class Conservatism articles. Politics stub templates can also be useful. The stub for a politician is {{Poli-bio-stub}} and a political organization is {{poli-org-stub}}. See WP:WikiProject Conservatism/Templates for more stubs.

C-Class

C-Class articles are assessed using Individual Review, and the author is free to assess the article.

B-Class

B-Class articles are assessed using Individual Review, rating is typically left to an independent editor; requests for an independent assessment may be made here.

GA-Class

The good article nomination process is an independent review mechanism through which an article receives a "good article" quality rating. The process involves a detailed review of the article by an independent examiner, who determines whether the article meets the good article criteria. Full instructions for requesting a good article review are provided on the good article review page.

A-Class

The WikiProject Conservatism A-Class review process is the most thorough and demanding assessment of article quality done by the WikiProject Conservatism. An article that undergoes this process must be reviewed by at least two independent examiners, each of whom must agree that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria. Full instructions for requesting an A-Class review are provided on the A-Class review page.

FA-Class

The featured article candidacy and featured list candidacy processes are an independent, Wikipedia-wide quality assessment mechanism; these processes are the only way an article can receive a "featured" quality rating. The process involves a comprehensive review of the article by multiple independent examiners, all of whom must agree that the article meets the featured article or list criteria. Full instructions for submitting a featured article or list candidacy are provided on the corresponding candidacy page. Editors are advised to carefully review the submission instructions; failing to follow them correctly may cause the submission to be rejected.

Article tagging FAQ

[edit]
Q: An article was erroneously tagged by a member of this project.
A: Do not remove the banner. Ask the member why they tagged it, or post a message at the project talk page (below). Note: the banner does not imply that the subject has a conservative or right-wing ideology, has no relevance to neutral POV, nor that WikiProject Conservatism owns the article.[1]
Q: I'm a member and the banner I added to an article talk page was removed.
A: From PROGGUIDE: You may not force them to remove the banner. No editor may prohibit a group of editors from showing their interest in an article. This warning {{WPRYT Uw-banner}} can be used to notify an editor of the guideline.
Q: Can non-members tag articles?
A: Yes, but if a member removes the banner do not replace it.[1]
Q: The quality or importance rating of an article is incorrect.
A: Anyone can change the rating. Make sure to consult the assessment scale here. Ratings are subjective, importance ratings in particular can be controversial. Disputes will be resolved by project members at the project talk page (below).[2][3]
Q: What is the scope of this WikiProject?
A: As stated on the main page of this project, we are dedicated to improving articles related to conservatism, not limited to any particular form or national variety of conservatism.

  1. ^ a b WikiProject Council/Guide
  2. ^ WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ
  3. ^ WikiProject Council/Guide/WikiProject

Assessment log

[edit]


December 22, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

December 21, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

December 20, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

December 19, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

December 18, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

December 17, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

December 16, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Former recognized content

[edit]

Former Featued articles and lists are good candidates for A-Class review.

Former featured articles

Anarcho-capitalism • Paul Bremer • Bricker Amendment • Tom Brinkman • Constitution of the United States • Gerald Ford • Frankfurt School • Bruce Johnson (Ohio politician) • Liberal Movement (Australia) • Libertarianism • John Major • Bob McEwen • Original sin • Political correctness • Read my lips: no new taxes • Nancy Reagan • Theodore Roosevelt • Nicolas Sarkozy • Jean Schmidt • Margaret Thatcher • Daniel Webster • Zionism

Former featured lists

List of chief ministers from the Bharatiya Janata Party

Former featured pictures
  • Commercial-LBJ1964ElectionAdDaisyGirl
Former good articles

Edmund Burke • George H. W. Bush • George W. Bush • James Cagney • David Cameron • Capitalism • Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh • Dick Cheney • Mike Cierpiot • Cold War • College Republicans • Death panel • Falun Gong • Foundation for Economic Education • Ayaan Hirsi Ali • Alan Keyes • Liaquat Ali Khan • Marcel Lefebvre • Rush Limbaugh • McCarthyism • Michigan Republican Party • Patrick Henry College • Ron Paul • Rape and pregnancy statement controversies in the 2012 United States elections • Condoleezza Rice • Ellen Roberts • Larry Sanger • Michael Savage • Second impeachment trial of Donald Trump • UMNO • Unitary executive theory • The Wall Street Journal • Geert Wilders • Wildrose Party • Michael Yon

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Conservatism/Assessment&oldid=1245687290#Quality_scale"
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy