Wikipedia:WikiProject Hermetism/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the Article Assessment page for WikiProject Hermetism. This page explains the grading scale for articles with declared interest of WikiProject Hermetism established through the addition of the {{WikiProject:Hermetism/HermetismBanner}} banner on an article's talk page. The ratings given to articles helps the WikiProject see where its focus needs to be and helps editors see that their contributions are appreciated by the Wikipedia community.

Any member of WikiProject Hermetism may create or change the ratings of a given article in accordance to the criteria guidelines on this page. If there is a disagreement between two members on what grading is appropriate on the same version, it should be discussed on this project page's talk page. If you would like an article rated or rerated, please add it to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Hermetism#rate at the bottom of the list.

[edit] Rating Instructions

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

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Hermetism/HermetismBanner
|class=
|importance=
|attention=
|peer-review= 
|old-peer-review=
|living=
|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 Hermetism articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

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 importance scale below.

[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 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. N/A
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, including at least one 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. 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. N/A
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, 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. N/A
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. N/A
Start
{{Start-Class}}		 The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. For example, an article on a Hermetist may encompass their importance to Hermetism or Hermeticism well, but fails to explain their non-Hermetic life effectively. 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
 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 even good enough for a cleanup tag: it still needs to be built. N/A
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 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. N/A
Needed
{{Needed-Class}}		 The article does not exist and needs to be created.      

[edit] Importance scale

Importance must be regarded as a relative term. If importance values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another. 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).

Consider a hierarchy such as History -> History of Europe -> History of Poland -> Polish kings and queens. An article labeled as "Top-Class" for the subject of history would probably warrant inclusion in V0.5, V1.0 and other releases. A "Top-Class" article for the history of Poland would be a reasonable candidate for inclusion, but most "Top-Class" articles on Polish kings & queens would probably not be included in early releases. Nevertheless such ranking within a subject area is very helpful in deciding which articles are included first as the scope of the Wikipedia 1.0 project expands. Quality articles which are not considered to be on topics important enough for inclusion on V0.5 will be held in a held nominations page, ready for inclusion as the scope expands.

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Fundamental to Hermetism and Hermeticism. The articles themselves; overview articles on the Hermetica; Hermes Trismegistus and Thoth; vital concepts to Hermetism and Hermeticism. Hermes Trismegistus
High Important, but not fundamental to Hermetism and Hermeticism. High-profile or influential Hermetists; Well-known Hermetic groups; ancillary concepts to Hermetism and Hermeticism. Aleister Crowley, Poimandres
Mid Average importance to Hermetism and Hermeticism, but not enough to warrant High-Class. Low-profile or rather uninfluential Hermetists; not so well-known Hermetic groups; concepts not always, but at least often, recognized as Hermetic in nature or origin. Manly Palmer Hall
Low Of little importance to Hermetism and Hermeticism, but still of importance. Obscure Hermetists and Hermetic groups; concepts usually not recognized as Hermetic in nature or origin, but conceivably recognized as Hermetic; influential non-Hermetic personalities in Hermetism and Hermeticism. Isaac Causabon