Article importance/priority rating scheme
| Priority |
Importance within field |
Impact |
Need for encyclopedia |
Examples |
| Top |
Article/subject is crucial to a broad-based understanding of human rights |
Widespread (global) and definitive impact on human rights |
An absolute "must-have" for any reasonable encyclopedia |
Human rights, Geneva Conventions |
| High |
Article/subject contributes a substantial depth of knowledge |
Significant impact outside context of article. Impact is global, regional or national. |
Very much needed, even vital |
Amnesty International, Freedom of speech, Rwandan Genocide |
| Mid |
Article/subject adds important further details to the topic of human rights |
Some impact on human rights outside immediate context of article. |
Adds further depth, but not vital to encyclopedia |
René Cassin, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Freedom House |
| Low |
Article/subject contributes more specific or less significant details |
Mainly of specialist interest - has little impact on human rights outside immediate context of article |
Not at all essential, or can be covered adequately in lists or other articles |
La Cantuta massacre, International Center for Transitional Justice, Crushing |
| (None) |
Article/subject may be peripheral |
May be only indirectly related to human rights. |
May not be relevant or may be too trivial in content to be needed |
Comment: such articles are not relevant enough to the Human rights project to need a rating. |
