Wikipedia:WikiProject The Clash/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the assessment department of The Clash WikiProject!

Article Assessments

These statistics are updated automatically daily.

The Clash
articles		 Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
Good article GA 2 2
B 5 2 7
Start 4 4 3 2 8 21
Stub 2 1 1 5 15 24
Assessed 13 5 4 7 25 54
Unassessed 14 7 1 12 34
Total 27 12 4 8 37 88

This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to The Clash. 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 {{WPClash}} project banner. This causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:The Clash articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

The quality assessments are mainly performed by members of WikiProjects, who tag talk pages of articles. These tags are then collected by a bot, which then generates output such as a table, log and statistics. The quality scale must be the same across all wikiprojects.

It is vital that people not take these assessments personally. It is understood that we all have different priorities and different opinions about what makes a perfect article. Generally an active project will develop a consensus, though be aware that different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area. If you contribute a lot of content to an article you may request an independent assessment.

Two levels, GA and FA, are not assessments that can be assigned simply by a project member. These refer to external judgments of article quality made at WP:GA and WP:FA. If these tags are desired, and the article meets the criteria (for GA or FA), it must be nominated (for GA or FA) and await comments. See also the guideline on the English Wikipedia.

There is a separate scale for rating articles for importance or priority, which is unrelated to the quality scale outlined here. Unlike the quality scale, the priority scale varies based on the project scope. See also a proposed template at {{Importance Scheme}} and the guideline on the English Wikipedia.

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 Clash 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 {{WPClash}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WPClash
|small=
|class=
|importance=
|attention=
|collaboration-candidate=
|past-collaboration=
|peer-review= 
|old-peer-review=
|nested=
}}

[edit] Template layout

small: Answer yes to make the template small and along the right side of the page (as opposed to at the top.)


class: The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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


importance: 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.


attention: Answer yes if the page needs immediate attention, otherwise remove this line.

This parameter populates Category:The Clash articles needing attention.


collaboration-candidate: Answer yes if the page is currently candidate to be the The Clash WikiProject Collaboration of the Fortnight, otherwise remove this line.

This parameter populates Category:The Clash WP Collaboration candidates.


past-collaboration: Enter the wikilink to the previous article that was The Clash WikiProject Collaboration of the Fortnight, otherwise remove this line.

This parameter populates Category:The Clash WP Past collaborations.


peer-review: Answer yes if the page is currently nominated for Peer review by WikiProject The Clash, otherwise remove this line.

This parameter populates Category:The Clash WP Requests for peer review.


old-peer-review: Answer yes if the page was peer reviewed by WikiProject The Clash, otherwise remove this line.

This parameter populates Category:The Clash WP Old requests for peer review.


nested: yes when the template is nested inside {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}

[edit] Quality

The quality assessments are mainly performed by members of WikiProjects, who tag talk pages of articles. These tags are then collected by a bot, which then generates output such as a table, log and statistics. The quality scale must be the same across all wikiprojects.

It is vital that people not take these assessments personally. It is understood that we all have different priorities and different opinions about what makes a perfect article. Generally an active project will develop a consensus, though be aware that different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area. If you contribute a lot of content to an article you may request an independent assessment.

Two levels, GA and FA, are not assessments that can be assigned simply by a project member. These refer to external judgments of article quality made at WP:GA and WP:FA. If these tags are desired, and the article meets the criteria (for GA or FA), it must be nominated (for GA or FA) and await comments. See also the guideline on the English Wikipedia.

[edit] Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]
Label Criteria 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)
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, 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. London Calling (as of March 2008)
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 and/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. The Clash (as of November 2007)
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. (White Man) In Hammersmith Palais (as of November 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. 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. Bankrobber (as of November 2007)

[edit] Importance

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-imortance" in one context may be only "Mid-importance" 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-importance" for the subject of history would probably warrant inclusion in V0.5, V1.0 and other releases. A "Top-importance" article for the history of Poland would be a reasonable candidate for inclusion, but most "Top-importance" 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.

[edit] Importance scale

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopaedia. High probability that non-Clash fans would look this up. Good article Main article, Good article London Calling, Group members
High Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopaedia. Subject is notable or significant within the fan community, but not necessarily outside it Majority of the studio albums
Mid Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Concerts for the People of Kampuchea
Low Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial. Concerts for the People of Kampuchea (album and EP)

[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] Requesting "GA" and "FA" nominations

The "GA" and "FA" labels should only be used on articles that have been reviewed and are currently designated as good articles or featured articles, respectively. The WikiProject bears ultimate responsibility for resolving disputes. (See Wikipedia:Good article nominations and Wikipedia:Featured article review)

Requesting GA

Requesting FA

[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 8, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] June 4, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] June 1, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 28, 2008

  • The Clash (album) reassessed from Unassessed-Class (Top-Class) to B-Class (Top-Class)

[edit] May 25, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 21, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 18, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 14, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 11, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] May 5, 2008

[edit] April 22, 2008

[edit] April 15, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 6, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] April 2, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 31, 2008

[edit] March 27, 2008

[edit] March 22, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 19, 2008

  • Mikey Dread reassessed from Unassessed-Class (No-Class) to Start-Class (High-Class)
  • The Singles (2007 album) reassessed from Start-Class (No-Class) to Unassessed-Class (No-Class)

[edit] March 16, 2008

  • Cut the Crap reassessed from B-Class (No-Class) to Start-Class (High-Class)
  • Rude Boy (film) reassessed from Start-Class (Top-Class) to Stub-Class (High-Class)

[edit] March 11, 2008

  • London Calling reassessed from B-Class (Top-Class) to GA-Class (Top-Class)

[edit] March 4, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 27, 2008

  • Charlie Don't Surf (song) (talk) Stub-Class (No-Class) removed.

[edit] February 25, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 19, 2008

  • Marty Munsch (talk) Unassessed-Class (No-Class) removed.
  • Charlie Don't Surf (song) (talk) Stub-Class (No-Class) added.
  • Janie Jones (song) reassessed from Unassessed-Class (Mid-Class) to Unassessed-Class (No-Class)

[edit] February 15, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 10, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] February 6, 2008

[edit] February 5, 2008

[edit] January 27, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] January 22, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] January 19, 2008

[edit] January 2, 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 The Clash
Article Import Date Assess Ver Comments
London Calling [1] Top March 11, 2008 Good article GA This is a decent article. --Midnightdreary (talk) 20:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a very important album (9th most, according to Rolling Stone), so I think more research, especially of older sources, should be done to make the article comprehensive and FA-worthy. indopug (talk) 14:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

–Excerpt from Peer review (edit comment)
The Clash [2] Top April 22, 2008 Good article GA I passed this for Good Article. It is a good article, and the only thing I could find wrong with it is that the bibliography should be noted in the "Notes" section. You have to shorten the references for the books in the "Notes" section, as WP:CITE says. But still, it's a good article, and it deserves the title. Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 02:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
–Excerpt from talk page (edit comment)
Combat Rock [3] Top November 7, 2007 B
Joe Strummer [4] Top November 7, 2007 B
Sandinista! [5] Top November 7, 2007 B
The Clash (album) [6] Top May 28, 2008 B
The Clash discography [7] Top November 7, 2007 B
Give 'Em Enough Rope [8] November 7, 2007 B
Super Black Market Clash [9] November 7, 2007 B
(White Man) in Hammersmith Palais [10] Top November 8, 2007 Start
Mick Jones (The Clash) [11] Top November 8, 2007 Start
Paul Simonon [12] Top November 8, 2007 Start
Topper Headon [13] Top November 8, 2007 Start
Cut the Crap [14] High March 16, 2008 Start Set Album Class to Start; Importance to Mid (in WP Albums) and High (in WP The Clash). The article lacks of information and it does not cite any references or sources. Please improve this article by expanding it and adding reliable references. The London Calling article can serve as excellent example for Cut the Crap article. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 15:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC) (edit comment)
Groovy Times [15] High November 8, 2007 Start
Jail Guitar Doors [16] High November 8, 2007 Start
Mikey Dread [17] High March 19, 2008 Start
Concerts for the People of Kampuchea [18] Mid November 11, 2007 Start
Don Letts [19] Mid May 5, 2008 Start
Pennie Smith [20] Mid March 27, 2008 Start
Big Audio Dynamite [21] Low May 5, 2008 Start
Concerts for the People of Kampuchea (album and EP) [22] Low November 8, 2007 Start
Capital Radio One [23] November 8, 2007 Start
From Here to Eternity: Live [24] November 8, 2007 Start
Joe Strummer: The Future Is Unwritten [25] November 11, 2007 Start
Sandy Pearlman [26] November 18, 2007 Start
The Clash at Bond's Casino [27] November 8, 2007 Start
The Cost of Living (EP) [28] November 8, 2007 Start
The Essential Clash [29] November 8, 2007 Start If you rated the article please REPLACE THIS LINE and give a short summary HERE to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. (edit comment)
Tymon Dogg [30] February 5, 2008 Start
Bankrobber [31] Top November 7, 2007 Stub
This Is Radio Clash [32] Top November 7, 2007 Stub
Rude Boy (film) [33] High March 16, 2008 Stub
Mick Gallagher [34] Mid March 27, 2008 Stub
Concert for Kampuchea [35] Low November 11, 2007 Stub
Havana 3am [36] Low May 5, 2008 Stub
London SS [37] Low May 5, 2008 Stub
The 101ers [38] Low May 5, 2008 Stub
The Latino Rockabilly War [39] Low May 5, 2008 Stub
Bill Price (record producer) [40] November 18, 2007 Stub
Brand New Cadillac [41] January 19, 2008 Stub
Caroline Coon [42] December 6, 2007 Stub
Futura 2000 [43] November 11, 2007 Stub
Keith Levene [44] November 11, 2007 Stub
Lost in the Supermarket [45] January 19, 2008 Stub
Rob Harper [46] November 16, 2007 Stub
Singles Box [47] November 7, 2007 Stub
Spanish Bombs [48] January 19, 2008 Stub
Terry Chimes [49] November 11, 2007 Stub
The Singles (The Clash album) [50] November 7, 2007 Stub
The Story of the Clash, Volume 1 [51] November 7, 2007 Stub
The Vanilla Tapes [52] November 7, 2007 Stub
Vince White [53] November 11, 2007 Stub
Westway to the World [54] November 11, 2007 Stub
Complete Control [55] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
I Fought the Law [56] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
I'm So Bored with the USA [57] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Know Your Rights [58] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
London Calling (song) [59] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Police and Thieves [60] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Remote Control (The Clash song) [61] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Rock the Casbah [62] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Should I Stay or Should I Go [63] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Straight to Hell (song) [64] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
The Call Up [65] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
The Magnificent Seven (song) [66] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Tommy Gun (song) [67] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
White Riot [68] Top November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Career Opportunities [69] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Clash City Rockers [70] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
English Civil War (song) [71] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Hitsville UK [72] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Pressure Drop (song) [73] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
This Is England (song) [74] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Washington Bullets (song) [75] High November 7, 2007 Unassessed
D.O.A. (1980 film) [76] Low March 27, 2008 Unassessed
Bernard Rhodes [77] November 18, 2007 Unassessed
Burning London: The Clash Tribute [78] November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Clampdown [79] November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Clash on Broadway [80] February 5, 2008 Unassessed
Ellen Foley [81] January 19, 2008 Unassessed
Guy Stevens [82] November 18, 2007 Unassessed
Janie Jones (song) [83] November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Nick Sheppard [84] November 7, 2007 Unassessed
Rock Against Racism [85] November 11, 2007 Unassessed
The Guns of Brixton [86] January 19, 2008 Unassessed
The Singles (2007 album) [87] March 19, 2008 Unassessed
Train in Vain [88] November 7, 2007 Unassessed
See also: assessed article categories. Last update: June 8, 2008