Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Biography
General information (edit · changes)
Departments
Infoboxes
More biography infoboxes...
Biography work groups
Things you can do (edit)
Biography article statistics

This list is generated automatically on alternate nights.
view full worklist

Biography
articles		 Importance
Top None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 21 480 501
A 2 19 21
Good article GA 24 970 994
B 151 14437 14588
Start 2 110997 110999
Stub 337848 337848
List 111 111
Assessed 200 464862 465062
Unassessed 55108 55108
Total 200 519970 520170

Hi and Welcome to the assessment department of the Biography WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Biography 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 recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

Category:Biography articles by quality serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPBiography}} project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Biography articles by quality.

Contents

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How can I get an article rated? 
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles? 
Any member of the Biography WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
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, 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 may I begin assessing articles? 
Assessment may be done through a variety of ways, but the most efficient is through use of the MetaData article assessment script.

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

[edit] Instructions on how to assess a Biography article

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPBiography}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed biography articles. At present, there are over 50,000 biography articles that need assessment (e.g., that need to have a class inserted in the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template).

Biography articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{WPBiography}} template on their talk page, but the template may be incomplete. First, give yourself access to the MetaData article assessment script by following the instructions at MetaData. Next, select an article from the list at Category:Unassessed biography articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{WPBiography}} template. Finally, select the appropriate answers for the MetaData script. You will be brought to the talk page where you may complete the assessment.

[edit] Class parameter

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed biography articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

    • List (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on list pages)

[edit] Priority parameter

The following values may be used for the priority parameter:

  • Top
  • High
  • Mid
  • Low

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 priority scale below. Note that the priority is used on the workgroup lists only.

[edit] Core parameter

The template also has a core=yes parameter for core articles only, as selected by the Core Biographies team.

[edit] Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme
Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Featured article FA
{{FA-Class}}		 Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status after community assessment, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. No further editing necessary, unless new published information has come to light. Wayne Gretzky
A
{{A-Class}}		 Reserved exclusively for articles that have received A-class status by the A-class review department. Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article as much as the existence of reputable sources allow it. 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 the "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 as much as the existence of reputable sources allow it. 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 could be helpful at this stage. Yannis Makriyannis
Good article 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 being a Good article is not a requirement for A-Class. Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, or 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. Bob Marley
B
{{B-Class}}		 Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a completed article. Nonetheless, it may feature significant gaps or missing elements or references, need substantial editing for English language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contain other policy problems such as copyright, NPOV or NOR. 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 may have trouble doing so, or would risk error in derivative work. Editing, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors, would be useful. Alfred Hitchcock (as of July 2006)
Start
{{Start-Class}}		 The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but does not provide complete information. Has at least one 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

NOTE: This is not a negative grade. There are no negative grades in Wikipedia. Having an article on Wikipedia is a passing grade, as all articles must pass Notability criteria. This grade is here to alert editors of articles that need some improvement to reach B-class

 Some readers will find what they are looking for, but many will not. A reader genuinely interested in the topic is likely to seek additional information elsewhere. Substantial editing is needed, with material for a complete article missing. The article needs to be built further. A. J. Croce
Stub
{{Stub-Class}}		 Either a very short article or a rough collection of information which is not yet structured as an article.

NOTE: This is not a negative grade. There are no negative grades in Wikipedia. Having an article on Wikipedia is a passing grade, as all articles must pass Notability criteria. This grade is here to alert editors of articles that need some improvement to reach Start or B-class

 Basic information. A brief, informed dictionary definition. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. Ayesha Al-Taymuriyya‎

[edit] Priority scale

Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If priority values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the biography falls under. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority 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).

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top High probability that non-Historians would look this up. Limited to the top 200 biographies. Must have had a large impact outside of their main discipline, across several generations, and in the majority of the world. For instance, Einstein, brilliant physicist, but his theories have affected people outside of physics and in many other countries besides his nation of origin and several generations. His ideas have changed the way people think. No member should give this rating to any biography without first getting Project approval from the other members. Albert Einstein
High Must have had a large impact in their main discipline, across a couple of generations. Had some impact outside their country of origin. Patrick Henry
Mid Important in their discipline. John Seigenthaler, Sr.
Low Subject is notable in their main discipline. Morena Baccarin

[edit] Requesting an assessment

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for it, please feel free to list it below. NOTE: This is only to rate the article on quality - you may or may not get feedback on the article. If you desire a review, use the peer review process. If you assess an article, please remove it so that other editors will not waste time reviewing the same articles. Thanks!

Seeking an A-class rating? Go to the A-class review department and follow the instructions on that page. You might first want to submit it for a Peer Review to allow us more time to respond and review.

Articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B', unless they are already rated as 'GA' by Wikipedia:Good articles/Candidates.

  1. Zab Judah, completely overhauled the article. Rvk41 (talk) 04:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Philip Jessup, rated as a stub but substantial edits. Burnsie510 (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  3. Otto Frederick Hunziker, substantial additions, re-assessed to B class by another project
  4. Joy Berry, rated as a stub, but has had editing (May 2008) uprated to start
  5. Kjell_Bloch_Sandved Nsaa (talk) 19:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC) hasn't been rated yet (and I don't know how to do it yet) Nsaa (talk) 19:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC) assessed as stub, to assess a biog article you add wpbiography template to it's talkpage
  6. Deborah Jeane Palfrey --Pensil (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC) uprated to B
  7. William Kent Krueger - this is a newly created article by a new editor. I've worked it up with guidance from my adopter and was hoping for an assessment. Thanks. Burntfingers (talk) 15:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC) assessed as start
  8. Cokie Roberts - hasn't been rated yet assessed as start
  9. Ernest Joyce - currently rated Start-class, please reassess. Brianboulton (talk) 22:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC) uprated to B
  10. Francis Weston References have been added and more info. There is not much more than this known on Weston.
  11. Benno Möhlmann, rated as stub, but has had editing (May 2008)
  12. Elisabeth Brooke, has nev3er had a rating
  13. Alex Foster, rated as stub, but has been edited substantially. Tstreet (talk) 19:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
  14. Mary Pope Osborne rated as stub, but has been edited substantially. EBY3221 (talk) 05:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  15. Sydney Jacobson, Baron Jacobson - rated as stub but substantial recent editing and additions
  16. John Billingsley new article.— Rod talk 09:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC) Rated as Start-class based upon WikiProject Somerset rating. --TommyBoy (talk) 12:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
  17. Camille Andrews - Article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 12:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC) Rated as Stub by another user. --TommyBoy (talk) 00:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  18. Paul Koehler I have done major editing to the article and I believe it is ready for a review. Trakrecord 00:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
  19. Eric Holder - Article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 03:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
  20. Yevgeny Primakov - Article needs reassessment --Fastboy (talk) 20:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  21. Harry Woolf, Baron Woolf - recently improved. Snowman (talk) 06:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  22. Vladimir Kvachkov - recently improved. --Fastboy (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  23. Tony Rezko - Currently rated as Start, but undergone improvement since rating almost a year ago. --Bobblehead (rants) 18:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  24. Kay Ivey - Article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 23:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

[edit] Current status

Biography
articles		 Importance
Top None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 21 480 501
A 2 19 21
Good article GA 24 970 994
B 151 14437 14588
Start 2 110997 110999
Stub 337848 337848
List 111 111
Assessed 200 464862 465062
Unassessed 55108 55108
Total 200 519970 520170

[edit] Historical counts

All figures given for the end of each month
July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006
Featured article FA 34 3.80 % 106 0.08 % 185 0.11 % 193 0.11 % 212 0.11 % 222 0.11 %
A 9 1.01 % 57 0.04 % 77 0.05 % 95 0.05 % 95 0.05 % 104 0.05 %
Good article GA 34 3.80 % 137 0.10 % 195 0.12 % 195 0.11 % 243 0.13 % 266 0.14 %
B 220 24.61 % 1,383 1.05 % 1,967 1.21 % 2,360 1.32 % 2,682 1.44 % 3,060 1.58 %
Start 104 11.63 % 4,107 3.13 % 5,634 3.47 % 6,621 3.71 % 7,980 4.30 % 34,554 9.37 %
Stub 67 7.49 % 3,515 2.68 % 27,816 17.12 % 41,572 23.27 % 43,715 23.59 % 46,635 24.15 %
Assessed 468 52.35 % 9,305 7.10 % 35,874 22.08 % 51,036 28.56 % 54,927 29.65 % 59,904 31.03 %
Unassessed 426 47.65 % 121,800 92.90 % 126,581 77.92 % 127,644 71.44 % 130,325 70.35 % 133,177 68.98 %
Total 894 131,105 162,455 178,680 185,252 193,081
January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007

May 2007

June 2007
Featured article FA 238 0.11 % 248 0.12 % 270 0.10 % 286 0.08 % 300 0.08 % 317 0.08 %
A 105 0.05 % 111 0.05 % 109 0.04 % 61 0.02 % 51 0.01 % 62 0.02 %
Good article GA 297 0.14 % 344 0.16 % 358 0.13 % 391 0.11 % 415 0.11 % 451 0.11 %
B 3,583 1.79 % 4,553 2.15 % 6,699 2.52 % 7,420 2.01 % 7,903 2.08 % 9,941 2.52 %
Start 9,617 4.98 % 12,049 6.02 % 16,774 7.92 % 29,405 11.05 % 38,107 10.04 % 60,286 15.44 %
Stub 49,852 24.91 % 62,198 29.36 % 85,677 32.02 % 207,699 56.33 % 219,635 57.87 % 240,797 61.14 %
Assessed 66,124 33.05 % 84,228 39.76 % 122,518 46.05 % 250,411 67.91 % 266,411 70.19 % 311,854 79.18 %
Unassessed 133,957 66.95 % 127,639 60.25 % 143,547 53.95 % 118,311 32.09 % 113,126 29.81 % 81,996 20.82 %
Total 200,081 211,867 266,065 368,722 379,537 393,850

[edit] Monthly changes

Percent change is given relative to the prior count in each class. To calculate the information for one class, where x = amount of articles in class that month and i = amount of articles in the class the previous month... Amount of articles change = x - i; Percent change = (x / i) * 100 - 100, then round up to the nearest one hundredth of a perecent.
August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006
Featured article FA +72 +211.76 % +79 +74.53 % +8 +4.32 % +19 +9.84 % +10 +4.72 %
A +48 +533.33 % +20 +35.09 % +18 +23.38 % +0 +0.00 % +9 +9.47 %
Good article GA +103 +302.94 % +58 +42.34 % +0 +0.00 % +48 +24.62 % +23 +9.47 %
B +1,163 +528.64 % +584 +42.23 % +393 +19.98 % +322 +13.64 % +378 +14.09 %
Start +4,003 +3,849.04 % +1,527 +37.18 % +987 +17.52 % +1,359 +20.53 % +1,637 +20.51 %
Stub +3,448 +5,146.27 % +24,301 +691.35 % +13,756 +49.45 % +2,143 +5.15 % +2,920 +6.68 %
Assessed +8,837 +1,888.25 % +26,569 +285.53 % +15,162 +42.26 % +3,891 +7.62 % +4,977 +9.06 %
Unassessed +121,374 +28,491.55 % +4,781 +3.93 % +1,063 +0.84 % +2,681 +2.10 % +2,852 +2.19 %
Total +130,211 +14,564.99 % +31,350 +23.91 % +16,225 +9.99 % +6,572 +3.68 % +7,829 +4.23 %
January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007

May 2007
Featured article FA +16 +6.72 % +10 +4.20 % +22 +8.87 % +16 +5.93 % +14 +4.90 %
A +1 +0.96 % +6 +5.71 % -2 -1.80 % -48 -44.04 % -10 -16.39 %
Good article GA +31 +11.65 % +47 +15.83 % +14 +4.07 % +33 +9.22 % +24 +6.14 %
B +523 +17.09 % +970 +27.07 % +2,146 +47.13 % +721 +10.76 % +483 +6.51 %
Start +2,432 +25.29 % +4,725 +39.22 % +12,631 +75.30 % +5,149 +17.51 % +8,702 +29.59 %
Stub +3,217 +6.90 % +12,346 +24.77 % +23,479 +37.75 % +122,022 +142.42 % +11,936 +5.75 %
Assessed +6,220 +10.38 % +18,104 +27.28 % +38,290 +45.46 % +127,893 +104.39 % +16,000 +6.39 %
Unassessed +780 +0.58 % -6,318 -4.72 % +15,908 +12.46 % -25,236 -17.58 % -5,185 -4.38 %
Total +7,000 +3.63 % +11,786 +5.89 % +54,198 +25.58 % +102,657 +38.58 % +10,815 +2.93 %
June 2007
Featured article FA +17 +5.67 %
A +11 +21.57 %
Good article GA +36 +8.67 %
B +2,038 +25.79 %
Start +22,179 +58.20 %
Stub +21,162 +9.64 %
Assessed +45,443 +17.06 %
Unassessed -31,130 -27.52 %
Total +14,313 +3.77 %

[edit] Assessment log

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality log

[edit] Worklist

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.



Contact with WP Biography
See also: assessed article categories. Last update: June 12, 2008
Languages