Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The current Wikipedia:Release Version open for article selection is 0.7. The article selection process for version 0.5 has finished, but version selection and publication remain.
Contents |
[edit] Nomination eligibility
Please note that items eligible for nomination still need to be reviewed to determine whether they are suitable for inclusion. Articles will be judged according to priority and quality.
[edit] Release Version 0.5
Nominations should be submitted to Wikipedia:Version 0.5 Nominations. Since Wikipedia:Version 0.5 is a test release, the number of articles is expected to be fairly small. Articles need to have no copyright or POV problems. Articles will be judged according to priority and quality. This works out in practice as follows:
- For a topic judged to be highly important, a lower quality may be allowed.
- For a less important topic, a high-quality article may be included if the topic is considered significant enough.
- If a certain lower-quality article is needed to complete a "set" (e.g. of the Solar system planets), then it may be included.
- Minimum standards of importance will apply - the article should be typically at the "Key Article" level or higher, meaning it would at least be expected to fall within the most important 1-2% of articles on Wikipedia. Likewise minimum quality standards will also apply - the article should normally be at the B-Class level, and usually higher.
- Lists and charts are also suitable, though different assessment criteria may need to be developed for dealing with these.
- Exceptions to the above may be made after discussion on the WP:V0.5 nominations talk page. One likely exception involves sets of closely related articles where the collection as a whole is of a high quality, but some individual pages are very short and may appear incomplete.
We are looking to include the following in this test release:
- Core topics, a list of about 150 important articles, as long as these articles meet a basic quality standard (B-Class or higher).
- Further core articles considered as a supplement to the above, as discussed at WP:CORE
- Continents, countries and global cities
- Vital articles
- Key articles (topics considered by WikiProjects to be essential for subject coverage in their area). Not all key articles will qualify.
- Featured articles if these are on significant topics.
- Featured lists if these are on significant topics.
- Articles rated as "A-Class" if these are on significant topics.
- Good articles if these are on significant topics.
- Articles needed for completeness - for example to complete a set of articles on US Network TV stations or chemical elements.
[edit] Release Version 0.7
This release has a broader scope than Version 0.5 and will include many more articles.
- Articles that give context (Poverty for Poverty in Pakistan)
- Articles from WP:WVWP once it gets some articles
- GA+ articles of mid importance or higher
- B-Class articles of high importance or higher
- Start-Class articles, only if they are part of a set or are essential.
- Articles needed for completeness
- Country subdivisions of major countries (not something like Senegal, at the review page)
[edit] Release Version 1.0
Nominations should be submitted to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Nominations. The scope for nomination eligibility is expected to gradually widen. For now, nominations are restricted to:
- Continents and countries
- Core topics, about 150 important articles
- Featured lists
- Featured articles
- Articles included in either previous release.
[edit] Importance of topic
Importance or Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If importance values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another.
By "priority" or "importance" of topics for a static version of the encyclopedia, we generally mean to indicate the level of expectation or desire that the topic would be covered in a traditional encyclopedia.
Consider a hierarchy such as History -> History of Europe -> History of Poland -> Polish kings and queens. An article labeled as "Top-Class" for the subject of history would probably warrant inclusion in V0.5, V1.0 and other releases. A "Top-Class" article for the history of Poland would be a reasonable candidate for inclusion, but most "Top-Class" articles on Polish kings & queens would probably not be included in early releases. Nevertheless such ranking within a subject area is very helpful in deciding which articles are included first as the scope of the Wikipedia 1.0 project expands. Quality articles which are not considered to be on topics important enough for inclusion on V0.5 will be held in a held nominations page, ready for inclusion as the scope expands.
[edit] Version 0.5
Need: The article's priority or importance, regardless of its quality
| Top | Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopaedia |
| High | Subject contributes a depth of knowledge |
| Mid | Subject fills in more minor details |
| Low | Subject is mainly of specialist interest. |
These criteria are based on those used at the Mathematics WikiProject. Individual WikiProjects are encouraged to incorporate this into their worklists.
[edit] Version 1.0
The criteria for priority or importance is automatically met by articles on continents, countries and designated core topics.
Other articles or lists nominated should be judged relative to entries that have already been found qualified for 1.0.
[edit] Proposed initial quality standards
Articles can be assessed using the WP:1.0 assessment scheme. For topics lying outside the core topics and vital articles lists, most articles will initially be expected to be "A-Class" or "FA-Class".
At least for now, articles are not expected to reach Featured Article standard. They are expected to be reasonably satisfactory for an ordinary reader. The following are minimum guidelines. Reviewers should use their judgment to determine whether more is required of any given entry.
- At least two people give the article a recent and at least moderate level of review and agree that it meets the standard. Ideally, at least one would be involved with the 1.0 project, at least one would be at least moderately knowledgeable about the subject, and at least one would be a layman about the subject.
- Any easily fixable problems should be fixed.
- In no particular order, articles should:
- be neutral point-of-view,
- be reasonably clear,
- be organized adequately,
- have no known factual errors,
- have appropriate categorization,
- be adequate in scope and proportion,
- use style consistent within the article,
- be visually adequate (that is, not ugly),
- use correct grammar, spelling and punctuation,
- list at least one appropriate reference, source, further information item, or external link. A link fulfills this obligation only if it connects to a reputable source. Government, professional or education sites are reputable for this purpose. Any external links must also still be valid (that is, still connect to the intended material).
- Pictures are recommended but normally not required. Exceptions may be made where especially relevant, such as an article about art.
[edit] Miscellaneous
[edit] Version 0.5
- We plan to end the nomination process after August 31, 2006, so as to allow for possible release in autumn 2006.
- With unstable articles we may choose to reject the article, or (if important enough) choose one particular earlier version that was relatively stable.
- With current events or articles related to them, the number of articles may be limited to highly significant topics so that last-minute article-checking is manageable.
[edit] Version 1.0
Articles are expected to be relatively stable.
- No edit wars or significant current editing disputes.
- At least for the time being, entries should be likely to need relatively little updating.
- No biographies of people who are still alive.
- No entries about current events.
- No entries about television shows still in their initial run.
