Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The assessment department of the Ships WikiProject focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's ships 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 {{WikiProject Ships}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Ships articles by quality, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Contents

[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 {{WikiProject Ships}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Ships}} 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 Ships 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; this is documented in the assessment scale.
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 review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for peer 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; this is documented in the assessment scale.
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, or contact the project coordinators directly.

[edit] Assessment instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Ships}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{WikiProject Ships| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}
Featured article FA
Featured list FL
A
Good article GA
B
Start
Stub

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

List
Disambig
Category
Template
Image
NA

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

As noted below, pages assessed as dab, cat, temp, img, and NA should be given an importance of NA as they are not in main article space. Also note that lists are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status.

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

Top
High
Mid
Low
NA
No

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

Articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed-importance Ships articles. The importance should be assigned according to the importance assessment below.

[edit] Quality scale

The quality scale is used to asses the quality of an individual article.

While much of the quality rating system is comparable across projects, WP:SHIPS articles have additional criteria as to content. What is rated higher class article by general Wikipedia or other projects' standards will be undoubtedly be well written and encyclopedic, but may miss a item considered key to WP:SHIPS. If it is missing key content or style, give it a lower rating. If in doubt, leave it unrated.

Class Criteria Formal process Example
Featured article FA Reserved for articles that meet the featured article criteria and have received featured article status after community review. Featured article candidates HMS Royal Oak (08) (as of March 2007)
A Reserved for articles that have received A-Class status after review by the project. Such articles are expected to largely meet the featured article criteria, and must be comprehensive, accurate, well-sourced, and decently-written; however, they may require some further copyediting. A-Class review USS Kentucky (BB-66)(as of November 2007)
Good article GA Reserved for articles that meet the good article criteria and have received good article status. Good article nominations SS Suevic (as of August 2007)
B The article meets the following five criteria:
  1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited.
  2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.
  3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
  4. It is free from major grammatical errors.
  5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.
 May be assigned by any reviewer

A checklist is available through {{WikiProject Ships}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details); this places the article in Category:B-Class Ships articles needing review or Category:Reviewed B-Class Ships articles, depending on how many criteria have been checked

 Cutty Sark (as of November 2007)
Start 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 ARA Santa Fe (S-21) (as of June 2007)
Stub 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 HMAS Warrnambool (J202) (as of July 2007)


[edit] Importance assessment

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 those interested in ships.

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.

Note also that importance criteria, unlike class, is project specific so should not be blindly copied from another project's assessment.

Status Template Meaning of Status Example
Top {{Top-importance}} This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information. Ship types, like aircraft carrier and galleon
High {{High-importance}} This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge. Ship classes, like County class cruiser
Mid {{Mid-importance}} This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas. Individual ships, like USS Fletcher (DD-445)
Low {{Low-importance}} This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia. Stubs for cancelled ships, like Soviet submarine TK-210
NA {{NA-importance}} This is not a main space article, but still a resource within the scope of the Project Images, templates, categories, disambiguation pages, and project pages such as this one.
No {{No-importance}} This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed.

Articles can be given an importance either higher or lower than the guideline as appropriate. A rating two or more levels different from the guideline should be the result of peer vote/review, while importance ratings one level higher or lower than the guideline can be initially assigned without discussion. That will cut down on bureaucracy. If there's a dispute about importance rating, a discussion will obviously be necessary. The discussion should be held on the talk page of the article, so that people can find it easily, but a note that a discussion is taking place should be placed on WP:SHIPS talk so that people can be made aware of it.

[edit] Statistics

[edit] Current status

Ships
articles		 Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 4 7 9 3 23
A 1 2 3
Good article GA 2 4 11 1 18
B 24 80 300 23 427
Start 135 788 7550 338 1 8812
Stub 42 783 5679 682 2 7188
List 139 127 23 289
Assessed 207 1802 13678 1070 3 16760
Total 207 1802 13678 1070 3 16760


[edit] Log

A full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.

[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. Requests for formal A-Class review should be made at the review department.

  1. Kuang Hua VI class missile boat
  2. Captain class frigate
  3. MV Oceanic Viking
  4. Russian submarine K-407 Novomoskovsk
  5. Huron Lightship7&6=thirteen (talk) 18:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Stan

Add new requests here

If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please list it for peer review instead.