Wikipedia:WikiProject Hanseatic League/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hanseatic League
articles		 Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
A 1 1 2
Good article GA 1 1
B 17 17
Start 1 2 28 31
Stub 2 1 3 9 15
List 1 1
Assessed 1 3 2 5 56 67
Unassessed 52 52
Total 1 3 2 5 108 119

Welcome to the assessment department of the Hanseatic League WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Hanseatic League or the people of Hanseatic League. 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.

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

Contents

[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 Hanseatic League 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!

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

[edit] Instructions

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

{{WPHL
|class=
|attention=
|collaboration-candidate=
|past-collaboration=
|peer-review= 
|old-peer-review=
|needs-infobox=
}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

[edit] Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]
Label Criterion Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Featured article 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)
Featured list 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)
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 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 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 Hanseatic League.

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.

We are currently discussing which articles should be counted as being of Top-importance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Hanseatic League/Assessment/Top-importance articles.

[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.

[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.


Archive This is a log of operations by a bot. The contents of this page are unlikely to need human editing. In particular, links should not be disambiguated as this is a historical record.


[edit] June 12, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] June 9, 2008

[edit] June 5, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] June 2, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 29, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 26, 2008

[edit] May 22, 2008

[edit] May 19, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 15, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 12, 2008

[edit] May 6, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 23, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 16, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 13, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 6, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 2, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 28, 2008

  • Treaty of Stettin reassessed from Unassessed-Class (No-Class) to Stub-Class (Low-Class)

[edit] March 23, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 21, 2008

  • Hanseatic flags reassessed from Unassessed-Class (No-Class) to Start-Class (No-Class)

[edit] March 18, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 14, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 10, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 7, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 2, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 26, 2008

[edit] February 22, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 18, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 14, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 9, 2008

[edit] February 5, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 2, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] January 26, 2008

(No changes today)

[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 Hanseatic League
Article Import Date Assess Ver Comments
Hanseatic League Top September 12, 2007 A
Berlin September 12, 2007 A Rated B Good selection of photographs and many references cited. Infobox statistics do not clearly state from which time period the figures are based. It is important when making figure comparisons to make certain all figures are from the same time period. Clear and concise population figures are a staple for any city article.
  • History section too extensive, should be summarized and possibly forked to a new article if references are available for content.
  • Article contains too many sections/sub sections.
  • Photographs should be referenced by the text, not introduce text.
  • Multiple citations are not neccessary for one statement, please select the most Reliable source.
  • At once refactoring of page has taken place, apply WP:LEAD.

Alan.ca 06:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)
Trade route [1] High November 8, 2007 Good article GA
Bruges September 12, 2007 B
Colchester September 12, 2007 B
Cologne September 12, 2007 B 0.5
Edinburgh September 12, 2007 B Appears to need a history section. The etymology and alternative names also seem excessively long for an article of this sort. Walkerma 05:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)
Groningen (city) September 12, 2007 B
Ipswich September 12, 2007 B
Kiel September 12, 2007 B
King's Lynn [2] November 23, 2007 B
Kingston upon Hull September 12, 2007 B .
  1. Copy-edits for consistency through article
  2. External links need looking at for relevance Y Done Per this edit.  Doonhamer | Banter  20:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  3. Some additional references required especially in the culture section
  4. References need switching to use one of the {{Cite}} templates

Would be good to sort out these minor items and go for GA review

Keith D 23:06, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Automated Review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?]
  • Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?]
  • This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, then an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.[?]
  • There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
    • arguably
    • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
    • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Keith D 20:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)
Lübeck September 12, 2007 B
Newcastle upon Tyne September 12, 2007 B ==Assessment==

Article grade: B
Reviewer: User:John_the_mackem
Date & Time: February 20 2007, 22:00

Pros:

  • Concise lead-in paragraph.
  • Good use of "iconic" image in top-right of article.
  • Places of interest in Newcastle is a useful summary.
  • Feature-rich article with a good balance of detail and readability. Good use of breakout articles, e.g. History of Newcastle.

Summary: Definitely a Featured-Article candidate with a little bit of work, some suggestions highlighted below. A huge improvement in only a couple of months. Well done to the contributors.


Cons:

  • Major lack of in-line citations for an article of this size (16, although 10 are in the Culture chapter alone), especially on facts. Too many to list all of them here. Citation warning banner at the top of the article is justified.
  • Images should be broken out of the gallery and put in-line with the text where they belong - some of the images in the gallery are in breach of WP:NOT#REPOSITORY - i.e. Wikipedia is not an image repository. Good use of images can enhance an article tremendously, e.g. Theatre Royal, Gray's Monument, St. Nicholas Catherdral. Other images such as Central Station and Centre for Life should be moved to the relevant place in the text to improve readability of the article. There is no need for three images of the Millenium Bridge, two of the civic centre, etc. - and the Sage is in Gateshead anyway! Consider moving some to the Wiki Commons.
  • Some unecessary small sub-headings (e.g. Science City, Music Television) which break-up the readability of the article and make the table of contents too long.
  • Seems to be some feature-creep as it occasionaly drifts into a "Tyneside" article, rather than specifically Newcastle. E.g. references to the North Shields ferry terminal, the A19, sport at Tynemouth, etc.
  • Is the "places of interest in the surrounding area" necessary? I think it is out-of-scope and slips the article into more of a tourist information than an encyclopedic article.

Summary: Major issues with citations and imbalance of image locations.


Further Suggestions:

  • Photos: Something in the history section, perhaps a sketch or artist impression of Pons Aelius? Photo of the Town Moor or Leazes Park in the Open Spaces section. Photo of St James' Park in the Sport section. Photo of Eldon Square or the Gate? Photo of Metro Arena in the Music section. Photo of the Pink Palace in the TV section.
  • A map would be useful, particularly in the Administration section to identify the wards.

John the mackem 22:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)
Novgorod Republic September 12, 2007 B
Riga September 12, 2007 B
Veliky Novgorod September 12, 2007 B
Warburg September 12, 2007 B
York September 12, 2007 B Although the article has no in-line references, there is so much info here that I had to rate it as B-Class. Sections/sub-sections need juggled a bit, infobox needs to be standardised (a job for WPCities maybe) and then the article should be submitted for peer review - its going on for GA status. --Mal 05:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Priority would be to sort out the references. Then go for an independant review to see if it can get GA status. Keith D 21:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)
Zwolle September 12, 2007 B
Count's Feud [3] Mid September 30, 2007 Start
Henning Podebusk [4] Low September 30, 2007 Start
Peter von Danzig (ship) [5] Low September 30, 2007 Start
Albrecht Giese [6] September 30, 2007 Start
All-Hallows-the-Great [7] May 22, 2008 Start
Bay Fleet September 12, 2007 Start
Beverley September 12, 2007 Start .
  1. Add inline references using one of the {{Cite}} templates
  2. Investigate first image in gallery
  3. Population figure for built-up area - what is this? Should it be lower figure for parish as per what the article is about
  4. Needs expanding of some sections

Keith D 22:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)
Bremen September 12, 2007 Start
Brick Gothic September 12, 2007 Start
Cog (ship) September 12, 2007 Start
Frankfurt (Oder) September 12, 2007 Start
Free City of Lübeck September 12, 2007 Start
Goslar September 12, 2007 Start
Great Yarmouth September 12, 2007 Start
Hanseatic flags [8] March 21, 2008 Start
Kaunas September 12, 2007 Start
Klaus Störtebeker September 12, 2007 Start
Koknese September 12, 2007 Start
Lüneburg [9] November 15, 2007 Start
Magdeburg September 12, 2007 Start
Rostock September 12, 2007 Start
Simon of Utrecht September 12, 2007 Start
Stade September 12, 2007 Start
Steelyard September 12, 2007 Start
Stralsund September 12, 2007 Start
Victual Brothers September 12, 2007 Start
Visby September 12, 2007 Start
Vreden September 12, 2007 Start
Wesel September 12, 2007 Start
Wismar September 12, 2007 Start
Zutphen September 12, 2007 Start
Bryggen [10] High September 30, 2007 Stub
Confederation of Cologne [11] High September 30, 2007 Stub
Treaty of Malmö [12] Mid November 29, 2007 Stub
Treaty of Copenhagen (1441) [13] Low September 30, 2007 Stub
Treaty of Speyer (1544) [14] Low October 6, 2007 Stub
Treaty of Stettin [15] Low March 28, 2008 Stub
Action of 26 July 1566 [16] September 30, 2007 Stub
Battle of Bornhöved (1227) September 12, 2007 Stub
Battle of Helsingborg [17] September 30, 2007 Stub
Elbe-Lübeck Canal September 12, 2007 Stub
Kontor September 12, 2007 Stub
Old Salt Route September 12, 2007 Stub
Ravenser Odd September 12, 2007 Stub
Treaty of Stralsund September 12, 2007 Stub
Treaty of Utrecht (1474) [18] September 30, 2007 Stub
List of ships of the Hanseatic League [19] November 6, 2007 List
Action of 30 May 1564 [20] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Action of 4 June 1565 [21] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Action of 7 July 1565 [22] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Armistice of Copenhagen [23] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Bishopsgate [24] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Boston, Lincolnshire September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Brick Renaissance [25] January 5, 2008 Unassessed
Brick Romanesque [26] January 5, 2008 Unassessed
Carta Mercatoria [27] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Chronicle of Henry of Livonia [28] February 26, 2008 Unassessed
Company of Merchant Adventurers of London [29] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Deventer September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Doesburg September 12, 2007 Unassessed this page is, by the looks of it, a "machine" translation of part of the Doesburg page in the dutch wikipedia and littered with untranslated or partially translated words, incorrect or incomprehensible grammar etc. Which begs the question whether "machine" translation of pages from other language wikipedias should be accepted or acceptable in the first place, even as a "start" or stub.--24.207.127.172 (talk) 19:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC) (edit comment)
Dutch-Hanseatic War [30] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Eastland Company [31] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Elbląg [32] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
European Route of Brick Gothic September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Gdańsk September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Georg Friedrich Sartorius [33] September 21, 2007 Unassessed
Georg Giese [34] February 9, 2008 Unassessed
Greifswald September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Hammershus [35] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Hansa [36] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Hanseatisk Museum September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Hattem September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Heinrich Sudermann [37] February 9, 2008 Unassessed
Kampen (Overijssel) September 12, 2007 Unassessed
List of Brick Gothic buildings [38] January 5, 2008 Unassessed
List of mayors of Danzig [39] November 26, 2007 Unassessed
Lists of Danzig officials [40] November 26, 2007 Unassessed
Liubice [41] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Lübeck law September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Merchants of the Staple [42] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Middle Low German [43] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Muscovy Company [44] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Navigation Acts [45] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Næstved [46] September 15, 2007 Unassessed B-rated, after extensive updating during the last month. Definitely amongst the largest Danish City-pages in English Wikipedia today. (edit comment)
Oldenzaal September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Patrick Colquhoun [47] January 22, 2008 Unassessed
Polish Gothic [48] January 5, 2008 Unassessed
Pskov Republic September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Roermond September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Scania Market September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Second Peace of Thorn (1466) [49] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Skipper Clement [50] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Staple port [51] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Staraya Ladoga September 12, 2007 Unassessed
Statute of the Staple [52] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Swedish War of Liberation [53] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
Szczecin [54] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
Teutonic takeover of Danzig (Gdańsk) [55] September 18, 2007 Unassessed
The staple [56] September 15, 2007 Unassessed
See also: assessed article categories. Last update: June 12, 2008