Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut: WP:IN1 WP:IN1.0

Quality: FA-Class | A Class | GA-Class | B-Class | Start-Class | Stub Class | Unassessed Importance: Top | High | Mid | Low | Unknown

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject India! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's India articles. While 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 recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WP India}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:India articles by quality and Category:India articles by importance, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Contents 1 Frequently asked questions 2 Requesting an assessment 3 Instructions 3.1 Quality scale 3.2 Importance scale 3.3 Importance standards 4 Participants 5 Example assessments 6 Log 7 Workgroup-level statistics

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 

Just add {{WP India}} 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 India WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Please add your name to the list of participants if you wish to assess articles on a regular basis.

Did the reviewer leave any comments? 

If the reviewer had a left a comment, a link, "(see comments)" will show up on the project banner, that will take you to the sub-page containing the comments.

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? 

The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.

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 we've 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? 

A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the statistics may be more accessible.

How do this all work? 

See Using the bot and WikiProject Council Guide.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

[edit] Requesting an assessment

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 use the peer review department instead. Please archive requests that are complete.

Please place new requests (in the format, # [[article name]] -- ~~~~ ) at the bottom of the list.

1. Sacred Heart Convent School (Jamshedpur) -- Arundhati Bakshi 16:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

   Done =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

2. Sathya Sai Baba -- Needs a lot of cleanup and new sources but ratings appreciated anyway. Ekantik ^talk 03:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC) )

   Done =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

3. Agnimitra -- Joy1963 17:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

   Done Vishwas 11:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

4. Chikkamagaluru district -- Amarrg 10:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

   Done - Vishwasshrikhande 12:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

5. Serfoji II -- Need more photos.However it would be better if the quality of the article is assessed. -- Ravichandar84 18:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

   Done Vishwas (Talk)

6. Kaun Banega Crorepati -- I have substantially increased the size of this article and added relevent sections, but now I would like to have this article assessed. Thank You! --Bhavesh.Chauhan 18:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

   Done Vishwas (Talk)

7. Prostitution in India

   Done Vishwas (Talk)

8. Kayastha
9. Konkani Language -- Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 07:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WP India}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{WP India| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class India articles)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class India articles)
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class India articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class India articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class India articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class India articles)
• NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article India pages)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed India 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 India articles)
• High (adds articles to Category:High-importance India articles)
• Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance India articles)
• Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance India articles)

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

[edit] Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]

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: a particularly 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	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 India.

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.

Status	Template	Meaning of Status
Top	{{Top-Class}}	This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information.
High	{{High-Class}}	This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.
Mid	{{Mid-Class}}	This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Low	{{Low-Class}}	This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.
None	None	This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed.

[edit] Importance standards

• States - Generally classed as top importance.
• Capital cities - Generally classed as top to high importance.
• Cities - Generally classed as mid to low importance.
• Places - Generally classed as mid to low importance.
• Schools - Generally classed as mid to low importance.

[edit] Participants

Please feel free to add your name to this list if you would like to join the assessment team

1. Ambuj.Saxena (talk • contribs)
2. Nichalp (talk • contribs)
3. Navdeep (talk • contribs)
4. Anupam (talk • contribs)
5. Ashwatham (talk • contribs)
6. Bakasuprman (talk • contribs)
7. Bhavesh.Chauhan (talk • contribs)
8. Chezhiyan (talk • contribs)
9. DaGizza (talk • contribs)
10. Dshenai (talk • contribs)
11. Ganeshk (talk • contribs)
12. Guruparan18 (talk • contribs)
13. Hunnyhiteshseth (talk • contribs)
14. Imthebest (talk • contribs)
15. Kanchanamala (talk • contribs)
16. Kundojjala (talk • contribs)
17. Leotolstoy (talk • contribs)
18. Lostintherush (talk • contribs)
19. Nadesai (talk • contribs)
20. Ncmvocalist (talk • contribs)
21. Pruthvi.vallabh (talk • contribs)
22. Rahulbrnwl (talk • contribs)
23. Rasputin98 (talk • contribs)
24. Ravi Chaudhary (talk • contribs)
25. Sfacets (talk • contribs)
26. Shreshth91 (talk • contribs)
27. Sound of silence (talk • contribs)
28. Srkris (talk • contribs)
29. Sumanthk (talk • contribs)
30. Thamizhan (talk • contribs)
31. Thinknirmal (talk • contribs)
32. Nirajrm (talk • contribs)
33. Nobleeagle (talk • contribs)
34. Vishy4 (talk • contribs)
35. Aileronajay (talk • contribs)
36. Mayank Abhishek (talk • contribs)
37. Jenigmat429 (talk • contribs)
38. Nmadhubala (talk • contribs)
39. Vishwasshrikhande (talk • contribs)
40. ARUNKUMAR P.R (talk • contribs)

[edit] Example assessments

To assess an article, paste one of the following onto the article's talk page.

Quality

• {{WP India|class=FA}} - to rate an article at FA-Class
• {{WP India|class=A}} - to rate an article at A-Class
• {{WP India|class=GA}} - to rate an article at GA-Class
• {{WP India|class=B}} - to rate an article at B-Class
• {{WP India|class=Start}} - to rate an article at Start-Class
• {{WP India|class=Stub}} - to rate an article at Stub-Class
• {{WP India}} - to leave the article un-assessed.

Importance

• {{WP India|importance=Top}} - to rate an article at Top importance
• {{WP India|importance=High}} - to rate an article at High importance
• {{WP India|importance=Mid}} - to rate an article at Mid importance
• {{WP India|importance=Low}} - to rate an article at Low importance

[edit] Log

The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available here. Unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.

[edit] Workgroup-level statistics

Indian states articles Importance None Total Quality FA 8 8 A GA B 22 22 Start 20 20 Stub 3 3 Assessed 53 53 Unassessed 0 0 Total 53 53	Karnataka articles Importance Top High None Total Quality FA 1 5 6 A GA B 1 4 5 Start 16 16 Stub 53 53 Assessed 1 1 78 80 Unassessed 0 0 0 0 Total 1 1 78 80	Kerala articles Importance Top Low None Total Quality FA 4 4 A 2 2 GA 1 1 B 1 12 13 Start 1 18 19 Stub 1 251 252 Assessed 2 1 288 291 Unassessed 0 0 1 1 Total 2 1 289 292
Maharashtra articles Importance High Low None Total Quality FA 1 2 3 A GA B 1 4 5 Start 1 7 8 Stub 1 10 11 Assessed 2 2 23 27 Unassessed 0 0 0 0 Total 2 2 23 27	West Bengal articles Importance Top High Mid None Total Quality FA 9 9 A GA B 7 7 Start 1 1 1 23 26 Stub 1 1 1 15 18 Assessed 2 2 2 54 60 Unassessed 0 0 0 0 0 Total 2 2 2 54 60
Tamil Nadu articles Importance High Low None Total Quality FA 5 5 A GA B 1 8 9 Start 1 98 99 Stub 1 2 248 251 Assessed 2 3 359 364 Unassessed 0 0 4 4 Total 2 3 363 368	Andhra Pradesh articles Importance None Total Quality FA A GA B 4 4 Start 7 7 Stub 52 52 Assessed 63 63 Unassessed 0 0 Total 63 63
Indian cities articles Importance None Total Quality FA 11 11 A 1 1 GA B 25 25 Start 65 65 Stub 641 641 Assessed 743 743 Unassessed 422 422 Total 1165 1165	Protected areas of India articles Importance Top High Mid Low None Total Quality FA A GA B 1 2 1 4 Start 1 9 10 Stub 2 1 30 33 Assessed 1 3 2 1 40 47 Unassessed 0 0 0 0 152 152 Total 1 3 2 1 192 199

Indian districts articles Importance None Total Quality FA 1 1 A GA B 9 9 Start 46 46 Stub 431 431 Assessed 487 487 Unassessed 204 204 Total 691 691	Indian politics articles Importance Top None Total Quality FA 6 6 A 2 2 GA 3 3 B 28 28 Start 2 64 66 Stub 331 331 Assessed 2 434 436 Unassessed 0 1743 1743 Total 2 2177 2179
Indian history articles Importance Top High Mid Low None Total Quality FA 2 15 17 A 2 1 3 GA 2 2 B 1 4 45 50 Start 1 1 82 84 Stub 1 816 817 Assessed 1 8 2 1 961 973 Unassessed 0 0 0 0 661 661 Total 1 8 2 1 1622 1634	Classical Tamil articles Importance None Total Quality FA 2 2 A GA B Start 1 1 Stub 3 3 Assessed 6 6 Unassessed 0 0 Total 6 6
Indian cinema articles Importance Top High None Total Quality FA 1 1 A 1 1 GA 2 2 B 2 13 15 Start 1 160 161 Stub 528 528 Assessed 2 2 704 708 Unassessed 0 0 934 934 Total 2 2 1638 1642	Indian literature articles Importance High Low None Total Quality FA A GA B 1 1 Start 1 12 13 Stub 1 31 32 Assessed 1 1 44 46 Unassessed 0 0 1 1 Total 1 1 45 47