Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Greece! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Greece and Greek related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the WP:1.0 program,

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPGR}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Greek articles by quality.

Contents 1 FAQ 2 Assessment instructions 2.1 Quality scale 2.2 Importance scheme 2.3 Statistics 2.4 Featured articles 3 Requests for assessment

[edit] FAQ

See also the general assessment FAQ.

1. What is the purpose of the article ratings? 

The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.

2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 

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

3. Someone put a {{WPGR}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. What should I do? 

Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).

4. Who can assess articles? 

Any member of the Greece WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes.

5. How do I rate an article? 

Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.

6. Can I request that someone else rate an article? 

Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.

7. 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.

8. Where can I get more comments about an article? 

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

9. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.

10. Aren't the ratings subjective? 

Yes, they are somewhat subjective, 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!

11. What if I have a question not listed here? 

If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.

[edit] Assessment instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPGR}} project banner:

{{WPGR| ... | class=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Greek articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as featured articles)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Greek articles; should only be used for articles that could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard.
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Greek articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as good articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Greek articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Greek articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Greek articles)

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

[edit] Quality scale

Label	Criteria	Formal process	Example
FA {{FA-Class}}	Reserved for articles that meet the featured article criteria and have received featured article status after community review.	Featured article candidates	Hippocrates (as of January 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.	May be assigned by any reviewer, but, generally, articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B', unless they are already rated as 'GA' by Wikipedia:Good article nominations.	Ioannis Makrygiannis (as of January 2007)
GA {{GA-Class}}	Reserved for articles that meet the good article criteria and have received good article status.	Wikipedia:Good article nominations	Rus'-Byzantine War (860) (as of December 2006)
B {{B-Class}}	The article meets the following five criteria: It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. It is free from major grammatical errors. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.	May be assigned by any reviewer A checklist is available through{{WPGR}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details); the checklist generates Category:B-Class Greek articles needing review (for current B-Class articles that may not meet all the criteria) and Category:Potential B-Class Greek articles (for below-B-Class articles that meet all five)	Alexander the Great (as of January 2007 (confirmed))
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; it 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	May be assigned by any reviewer	Eleftherios Venizelos (as of January 2007)
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.	May be assigned by any reviewer	Siege of Antioch (1084) (as of January 2007)

[edit] Importance scheme

Article importance grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]

Label	Criteria	Examples
Top	Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field.	Greece and the "X of Greece" articles (such as History of Greece).
High	Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Also, the immediate children of the "X of Greece" articles.	History of Modern Greece
Mid	Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area.	Muslim minority of Greece
Low	Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. In summary, pretty much everything else.	Galatsi
NA	Non-articles, templates, categories, redirects, etc.	{{WPGR}}

[edit] Statistics Greek articles Importance Top High Mid Low None Total Quality FA 5 14 15 5 39 A 1 1 3 1 6 GA 1 9 18 6 34 B 32 104 176 87 35 434 Start 40 436 1024 1539 695 3734 Stub 1 91 793 2526 1449 4860 Assessed 80 655 2029 4164 2179 9107 Unassessed 2 5 54 758 819 Total 80 657 2034 4218 2937 9926

[edit] Featured articles 300 (film) Alcibiades Archimedes Aspasia Basiliscus Battle of Greece Byzantine Empire Caspian expeditions of the Rus Corinthian War Cretan War Demosthenes El Greco Epaminondas George I of Greece Greek Mythology Gregory of Nazianzus Hippocrates Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria Macedonia (terminology) Manuel I Komnenos Maximus the Confessor Names of the Greeks Orion (mythology) Pericles Princess Alice of Battenberg Rhodes blood libel Simeon I of Bulgaria Slavery in ancient Greece Theramenes Thrasybulus Treaty of Devol War against Nabis

[edit] Requests for 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.

1. Naucratis
2. Aeschylus
3. Prometheus
4. Pandora
5. Dimitris Papaioannou
6. Eleftherios Venizelos