Wikipedia:WikiProject Children's literature

{{Children'sLiteratureWikiProject
|class= 
|importance= 
|needs-infobox=
|incomp-infobox=
|needs-infobox-cover=
|past-selected-article-bio=
}}

Welcome to the assessment department of the Children's Literature WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's children and young adult literature related articles. 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.

• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/1 (417 articles)
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/2 (402 articles)
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/3 (420 articles)
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/4 (422 articles)
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/5 (398 articles)
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/6 (404 articles)
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Children and young adult literature articles by quality/7 (185 articles)

Children and young adult literature articles		Importance
		Top	High	Mid	Low	None	Total
Quality
	FA	1	7	5			13
	GA	4	3	7	4		18
	B	2	14	24	9		49
	Start	4	50	172	77		303
	Stub	3	17	556	665		1241
	List			1	1	22	24
	Assessed	14	91	765	756	22	1648
	Unassessed					1000	1000
	Total	14	91	765	756	1022	2648

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 

Just add {{Children'sLiteratureWikiProject}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

Someone put a {{Children'sLiteratureWikiProject}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem appropriate. What should I do?

If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of the project (or directly with the person who tagged the article).

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 Children's Literature WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.

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.

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 WP:1.0 have been able to devise; if you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!

What if I have a question not listed here?

Leave a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Children's literature.

[edit] Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{Children'sLiteratureWikiProject}} project banner on its talk page:

{{NovelsWikiProject| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

• Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance novel articles)
• High (adds articles to Category:High-importance novel articles)
• Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance novel articles)
• Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance novel articles)

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases.

[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 additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible.	Tourette Syndrome (as of July 2007)
FL {{FL-Class}}	Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured lists" status, and meet the current criteria for featured lists.	Definitive. Outstanding, thorough list; a great source for encyclopedic information.	No further additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible.	FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives (as of January 2008)
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 reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy (peer-reviewed where appropriate). 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 acceptable. 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, 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.	International Space Station (as of February 2007)
B {{B-Class}}	Commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process. Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage 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.	Jammu and Kashmir (as of October 2007) has a lot of helpful material but needs more prose content and 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 meant to be an probable indication of how significant the topic is to a reader of literature, and how likely it would be covered in a serious encyclopedia.

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.

[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. (Note that this is not required; any editor may assess or re-assess an article on their own, if acting in good faith.)

If you assess an article, please strike it off so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Comments are not mandatory and any should be left at the article's talk page; the list below will be wiped periodically.

1. Lord of the flies
2. Bows Against the Barons (previously rated as stub/low)
3. Fly by Night—Should be at least Start class IMO me_and (talk) 15:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
4. Verdigris Deep—As above me_and (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
5. Add new requests above this line

If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please list it at Wikipedia:Good article nominations instead.

[edit] Participants

This is a list of Wikipedians who are committed to this WikiProject. If you're interested in helping with this project, please, feel free to join by clicking edit on the right, and signing your name at the bottom of the list with four tildes (~~~~), with an optional comment. A

Add this template to your user page {{user WikiProject Children's literature}}

This user is a member of the Children and Young Adult Literature WikiProject.

You don't need to be actively writing articles to be a participant. Please add your name to the list below (you may add a comment if you wish).

Editors who make no edits to Wikipedia at all in six months will be pruned from the list. Editors can always join the list again when they return to Wikipedia.

1. 60 Delta (talk · contribs)—Joined (#24)—
2. Abbeybufo (talk · contribs) —Joined on 11 March 2007—I am a published writer on the history of Children's Literature, mainly on the history of Children's Book Awards (Newbery Medal, Caldecott Medal and their equivalents all over the English-Speaking world), am an Elsie J. Oxenham expert, and have some knowledge of other girls' storywriters.
3. Aidoflight (talk · contribs)—Joined (#1)—
4. Awadewit (talk · contribs) —Joined (#20)—Most of my articles will be on eighteenth-century British children's authors and texts since that is my area of scholarly expertise
5. Bellwether_BC (talk · contribs)—Joined on 5 January 2008—
6. BengalRenaissanceEccentrica (talk · contribs)—Joined (#8)—
7. Cgingold (talk · contribs) - writer of non-fiction children's history, etc.
8. Cheesefee (talk · contribs) - merged from Shredderman project 28 March 2008.
9. Elizabeth_Lund (talk · contribs)—Joined (#12)—
10. FinFangFoom (talk · contribs)—Joined (#13)—
11. Freechild (talk · contribs)—Joined 9 January 2008
12. Joyous! (talk · contribs)—Joined on 9 November 2007—Concentrating for now on Newbery Honor books
13. KGV (talk · contribs)—Joined (#2)—
14. Kitia (talk · contribs)—Joined (#18)—I've been working on this for a while now, but have never officially joined
15. KittyRainbow (talk · contribs)—Joined on 24 October 2007—
16. Ladywitchthought (talk) 06:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)-I'm interested in Narnia, Harry Potter, ASOUE and The Faraway Tree Series
17. Lbr123 (talk · contribs)—Joined (#14)—
18. Lemonsour (talk · contribs)—Joined (#23)—
19. Mavarin (talk · contribs) —Joined on 28 July 2006—Concentrating on L'Engle for now
20. Mervyn (talk · contribs) —Joined (#26)—Wide-ranging interests.
21. Mistsrider (talk · contribs) —Joined on 07 February 2008— Particularly interested in Ursula Le Guin's Earthsea and other female authors I believe are underappreciated (Susan Cooper, Patricia C. Wrede), as well as literature with odd stories and/or female protagonists, but will help out wherever I can.
22. N p holmes (talk · contribs)— 23 Feb 2008—
23. Nothing444 (talk · contribs)
24. Nuclear froggy (talk · contribs) —Joined on 29 April 2007—
25. Pegship (talk · contribs)
26. plad2 (talk · contribs)—Joined 20 February 2008 - I'm a Publisher at Random House Children's Books UK.
27. Sanjay Tiwari (talk · contribs) —Joined on 18 September 2006—I'm very interested in Victorian and Edwardian (British) children's literature, especially the out-of-prints authors. I've created templates for 18th Century British Children's Literature, 19th Century British Children's Literature, and Early 20th Century British Children's Literature.
28. Strdst grl (talk)—Joined (#25)—
29. Tem2 (talk · contribs)—Joined (#7)—
30. Tomandlu (talk · contribs)—Joined (#4)—
31. Tyciol (talk · contribs)—Joined (#32)—
32. Woggly (talk · contribs)—Joined (#6)—