Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut: WP:CHIASSESS

Welcome to the assessment department of the Chicago WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Chicago 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:Chicago articles by quality serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Chicago articles by quality.

Contents 1 Frequently asked questions 2 Introduction to assessing a Chicago article 2.1 Class parameter 2.2 Priority parameter 3 Project assessment Policy 3.1 Quality scale 3.2 Priority scale 4 Requesting an assessment 4.1 Quality Assessment Requests 4.2 Importance Assessment Requests 5 Statistics 5.1 Current status 5.2 Historical counts 6 Assessment log 7 Current Top-importance Candidates 7.1 Votes

[edit] Frequently asked questions

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 Chicago 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.

[edit] Introduction to assessing a Chicago article

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Chicago articles. At present, there are over 100,000 Chicago articles that need assessment (e.g., that need to have a class inserted in the class parameter of the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} template).

{{ChicagoWikiProject
 |class= (choose one: FA, A, GA, B, Start, Stub, Dab, Template, Cat, Image, List, NA)
 |importance= (choose one: Top, High, Mid, Low, NA)
 |needs-infobox= (choose one: Yes No)
 |needs-photo= (choose one: Yes No)
 |attention= (choose one: Yes No)
}}

Chicago articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} 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 Chicago articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{ChicagoWikiProject}} 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:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Chicago articles)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Chicago articles)
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Chicago articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Chicago articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Chicago articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Chicago articles)
• NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article Chicago pages)
  • Dab (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on disambiguation pages)
  • Template (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on template pages; see example)
  • Cat (a more specific categorization than NA, for use on category pages)

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

[edit] Priority parameter

The following values may be used for the priority parameter:

• Top - (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Chicago articles)
• High - (adds articles to Category:High-importance Chicago articles)
• Mid - (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Chicago articles)
• Low - (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Chicago 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 priority scale below. Note that the priority is used on the workgroup lists only.

[edit] Project assessment Policy

[edit] Quality scale

Shortcut: WP:CHIQUALITY

Article progress grading scheme

Label	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editor's experience	Example
FA {{FA-Class}}	Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status after peer review, 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.	Barack Obama
A {{A-Class}}	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. No editors involved in the writing of an article should self-assess their article at this level. Best venue for achieving this class is to request a Peer review	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject as much as the existence of reputable sources allow it. 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.	Chicago
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, 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.	Chicago Board of Trade Building, Washington Square Park, Chicago
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, NPOV or 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.	Richard M. Daley
Start {{Start-Class}}	The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a table. For example an article on Queen Elizabeth might cover her personality well, but be weak on back story. 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 NOTE: This is not a negative grade. There are no negative grades in Wikipedia. Having an article on Wikipedia is a passing grade, since it has to pass Notability. This grade is here to alert editors of articles that need some improvement to reach B-class	Not useless. Some readers will find what they are looking for, but most will not. Most articles in this category have the look of an article "under construction" and a reader genuinely interested in the topic is likely to seek additional information elsewhere.	Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article usually isn't developed enough for a cleanup tag: it still needs to be built.	Robie House, Little Italy, Chicago
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. NOTE: This is not a negative grade. There are no negative grades in Wikipedia. Having an article on Wikipedia is a passing grade, since it has to pass Notability. This grade is here to alert editors of articles that need some improvement to reach Start or B-class	May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful.	Washington Park Subdivision
Needed {{Needed-Class}}	The article does not exist and needs to be created.

[edit] Priority scale

We have decided for the time being to mark "Top" only the 0.2% (or 20) Chicago related articles.

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 Chicago article 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). A good indicator for a high level of public interest is if a large number of different editors have contributed to the page.

These ratings do not reflect the general importance of an article from a cultural or social perspective. For example, the most viewed pages on the internet or on wikipedia do not mesh with conventional views on importance. Sometimes celebrity will have more of a bearing on priority assessment than conventional importance. As a result, several individuals would have higher priority assessment than our own mayor, as an example.

Shortcut: WP:CHIPRIORITY

Article importance grading scheme

Label	Criteria	Examples
Top	High probability that non-Chicagoans would look this up. Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia. Must have had a large impact on non-Chicagoans, across several generations, and in the majority of the world in a role as a Chicagoan or as a Chicago institution. Examples, would be Hall of Fame athletes, world class institutions, important national politicians, world class physical structures, and must see tourist attractions. For instance, Michael Jordan, elite basketball player, but his accomplishments have affected and inspired people outside of basketball and in many other countries besides his nation of origin and several generations. Going forward, no member should give this rating to any Chicago article without first getting Project approval from the other members. Note that an athlete who plays briefly in Chicago before going on to a Hall of Fame career does not count. A prime example is Dominik Hasek who has been honored extensively for his hockey accomplishments. We must emphasize role as a Chicagoan. This is easily seen at Barack Obama who was born in Hawaii, but is a mid priority for Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii. Obama also serves as an example of high priority in Chicago for as an individual who rises to prominence at a national or international level as an extension of a Chicago role.	Michael Jordan, Barack Obama
High	Must have had (A) a large impact on Chicagoans and an impact on non-Chicagoans, across a couple of generations in a role as a Chicagoan or as a Chicago institution or (B) a prominent national and/or international role that had a large impact on non-Chicagoans and an impact on Chicagoans. Subject contributes a depth of knowledge. Examples would be very important buildings, any currently serving Chicagoland U.S. Congressman, important Chicago athletes, and important institutions.	(A) Chicago Board of Trade Building (B) Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Mid	Must have had a role that was (A) Important to Chicagoans for role as a Chicagoan or as a Chicago institution, (B) a prominent national and/or international role that had a large impact on non-Chicagoans and but had a limited role as a Chicagoans (C) both of moderate national and/or international importance and moderate local importance. Subject fills in more minor details. Examples would be interesting buildings, personalities and architectural elements. Other examples would be nationally prominent individuals who played no significant role as a Chicagoan before rising to such prominence. Here longevity may be a point of distinction because it is certainly hoped that a building such as Joffrey Tower becomes important to non-Chicagoans over time. Many current and recent statewide elected Illinois politicians would fall under type (C) here unless they rose from prominent Chicago positions.	(A) Joffrey Tower (B) Nancy Reagan, Dominik Hasek, Hillary Clinton (C) Joan Cusack, Richard Durbin
Low	Subject is notable to select Chicagoans for role as a Chicagoan or as a Chicago institution. Subject is mainly of specialist interest. Examples would be (A) other buildings and narrow topics, (B) Professional athletes of moderate importance who briefly played in Chicago, (C) Alumni of local universities that have become notable article subjects for non-Chicago related roles. The most contentious of these types has been the alumni type. Persons may be listed in Chicago related categories due to their place of birth, place where they were reared as youths, place where they were educated (high school, college, graduate school), place where they performed their notable service/acts, place where they resided as adults. Arguably, the place where they were educated is most likely to both trigger a Chicago category tag and yet be of seeming minor significance. Generally, an article subject notable enough to merit a biographical Wikipedia entry is a (positive or negative) role model for many who are current and recent students of the institution of which they are an alumnus and who have an interest in the particular field of notability. In college towns (e.g. Ann Arbor, MI), where the population ebbs and flows with the academic calendar, alumni may be even more important to Wikipedia editors interested in contributing to the articles related to that geographical region. Notable politicians may be important to law students, politics and history majors; Wall Street Chieftans may be important to business school students, economics and finance majors; and famous scientists may be important to medical students and various science majors. Thus, each alumnus is of interest to select persons. In general, they will be of less import and thus be a lower editorial priority than “people from a region” who are likely to have roots in the region that are likely merit return visits that make them more notable to others from the region.	(A) Smith Museum of Stained Glass Windows (B) Lawrence Funderburke (C) Jon Corzine

[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 assess an article, please strike it off using <s>Strike-through text</s> so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Thanks! Generally, articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B', unless they are already rated as 'GA' by Wikipedia:Good articles/Candidates.

You may bring to our attention an article that has either not recieved any importance/priority rating or that you believe has been incorrectly assessed. List the article below. If it has been previously assessed (incorrectly in your opinion) also 1.) state its current assessment level, 2.) check its talk page edit history to find the assessor and state it here (it is better to get a new assessor for reassessment), 3) summarize why you feel the assessment is not correct.

[edit] Quality Assessment Requests

Regional Transportation Authority (Illinois) Y Done--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The School of the Art Institute of Chicago Y Done--Kranar drogin 11:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Berwyn, Illinois The site has been edited well Elizabeth BY (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Importance Assessment Requests

[edit] Statistics

[edit] Current status

Chicago articles		Importance
		Top	High	Mid	Low	None	Total
Quality
	FA	3	4	7	16		30
	FL	1	1	2	2		6
	GA	2	11	60	27		100
	B	21	33	176	251	18	499
	Start	3	35	406	2141	264	2849
	Stub		7	280	4183	1694	6164
	List		2	34	14	10	60
	Assessed	30	93	965	6634	1986	9708
	Unassessed			6	11	5157	5174
	Total	30	93	971	6645	7143	14882

[edit] Historical counts

[edit] Assessment log

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

[edit] Current Top-importance Candidates

Chicago Loop Soldier Field Walter Payton George Halas Chicago Blackhawks Sears, Roebuck and Company Grant Park (Chicago) Magnificent Mile

Museum Campus Dick Butkus United Airlines McDonald's Playboy Red Grange Chicago Tribune Cyrus McCormick

Daniel Burnham William Wrigley Jr. Northwestern University World's Columbian Exposition Leopold and Loeb Skidmore, Owings and Merrill Chicago River History of Chicago

The Jungle List of Chicago Landmarks Lake Shore Drive Haymarket Riot Museum of Science and Industry (Chicago) John Hancock Center The Blues Brothers (film) Union Stock Yards Chicago school (architecture)

---

Make suggested additions to the above list on the talk page.

[edit] Votes