Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Assessment

Album pages by quality
Quality
	Total
FA	171
FL	76
GA	1,563
B	1,716
C	9,657
Start	61,025
Stub	75,880
List	1,561
Category	47,858
Disambig	252
File	159,278
Project	198
Redirect	30,578
Template	715
NA	73
Draft	163
Assessed	390,764
Unassessed	10
Total	390,774
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 807,307			Ω = 5.38

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Albums. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's album articles. 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 {{WikiProject Albums}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Album articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist (Index · Statistics · Log).

How to nominate a page

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please place it at the bottom of the section for assessment requests below, using the syntax:

# {{la|ArticleName}} ~~~~ 

with an edit summary of "Nominating [[ArticleName]]". Please note that articles can only be given a rating up to B-class here. For Good Article class and higher, more formal reviews are needed (see table above for details).

How to review an article

1. Check that you have logged in; anons may not review articles.
2. Choose an article to review, noting:
   • You cannot choose an article if you have made significant contributions to it.
   • Nominations near the top of the lists are oldest, and should be given higher priority.
3. Read the whole article.
4. Place the {{WikiProject Albums| class=}} tag at the top of the article's talk page if it does not already exist.
   • Read the quality scale and set the class parameter to B, C, start, stub or NA.
5. Save the talk page. If you wish to leave detailed comments about your assessment, there is an option to do so on the project banner.
6. Remove the article from the section for assessment requests using the edit summary "Assessed [[ArticleName]]".

Frequently asked questions

Why can articles only be assessed up to B class here?

Higher classes need a more formal assessment so that standards are maintained.

• Good article nominations are processed here.
• A-class reviews are not performed by the albums Wikiproject at the moment. As an alternative, you may request a peer review.
• Featured articles candidates are processed here.

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.

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.

Instructions

Quality assessments

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{Album}} banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Albums| ... | class=??? | ...}}

class

This optional parameter records the Project quality assessment rating currently assigned to the particular article on whose talkpage the project banner appears.

If unassigned, or an invalid value is given, the parameter defaults to "unassigned" and the template places the talkpage into Category:Unassessed Album articles.

The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

Valid values for this parameter, their associated meanings and categories are given in the table below. Values should be typed as shown (e.g. |class=GA ):

Class parameter values (Category:Album articles by quality)

Value	Use for	Adds article to the category	What it looks like
For articles
FA	Featured articles	FA-Class Album articles	FA
FL	Featured lists	FL-Class Album articles	FL
A	A-class articles	A-Class Album articles	A
GA	Good articles	GA-Class Album articles	GA
B	B-class articles	B-Class Album articles	B
C	C-class articles	C-Class Album articles	C
Start	Start-class articles	Start-Class Album articles	Start
Stub	Stub-class articles	Stub-Class Album articles	Stub
List	List-class articles	List-Class Album articles	List
Future	Articles on future topics, for example an album yet to be released.	Future-Class Album articles	Future
For non-article pages
Category or Cat	Categories	Category-Class Album articles	Category
Disambig or Dab	Disambiguation pages	Disambig-Class Album articles	Disambig
Draft	Drafts that are part of the project.	Draft-Class Album articles	Draft
File	Image, sound, and other media files	File-Class Album articles	File
Portal	Pages that are part of the Albums Portal namespace.	Portal-Class Album articles	Portal
Project	Pages that are part of WikiProject Albums namespace.	Project-Class Album articles	Project
Redirect	Pages that exist only as redirects.	Redirect-Class Album articles	Redirect
Template	Templates that are part of the project and portal.	Template-Class Album articles	Template
NA	Any other pages that are not articles or where assessment is unnecessary.	NA-Class Album articles	NA

Quality scale

This scale describes specific criteria for album articles. For the main Wikipedia Version 1.0 WikiProject article progress grading scheme, go here.

WikiProject Albums article progress grading scheme

Label	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA {{FA-Class}}	The article has attained Featured article status. This is not assessed by this project; the article must have passed the FA review process. More detailed criteria The article must meet the featured article criteria: A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes. It is: well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard; comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate; neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of: a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.	Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.	Too Much Too Soon (as of June 2020)
FL {{FL-Class}}	The article has attained Featured list status. This is not assessed by this project; the article must have passed the FL review process. More detailed criteria The article must meet the featured list criteria: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations. (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists and includes at minimum eight items; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly. (c) Accessibility. It uses proper formating to be accessible to all readers. Bulleted and unbulleted lists and tables are structured correctly. Visual media, if included, utilize alternative (alt) text. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.			List of best-selling albums in the United Kingdom (as of June 2020)
A {{A-Class}}	Not used by this project	NA	NA	NA
GA {{GA-Class}}	The article has attained Good article status. This is not assessed by this project; the article must have passed the GA review process. More detailed criteria The article must meet the good article criteria: A good article is: Well-written: the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); it contains no original research; and it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia.	Some editing by album and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured album article may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.	Murdering Oscar (And Other Love Songs) (as of June 2020)
B {{B-Class}}	The article is mostly complete and without major issues, meeting the six B-Class criteria. It should have all of the C-Class criteria as well as: A complete infobox, including cover art and most technical details. A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians. No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources. No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS.	Most readers should feel satisfied by the content, although it may not satisfy more expert readers. There are no obvious omissions, but also no obvious extraneous information—such as "trivia". The article flows well and logically.	While a few aspects of content and style may need to be addressed, the article overall complies with tone and content guidelines.	Platinum (as of June 2020)
C {{C-Class}}	The article is substantial and has some references to reliable sources, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. It should have all the Start-Class criteria as well as: A reasonably complete infobox, including cover art. At least one section of prose (in addition to the lead section). A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs. A "personnel" section listing performers, including guest musicians.	A casual reader should learn something about the album.	Possible subjects to include are the events leading up to its recording, stories of its recording and release, critical reception, reception by fans or its influence in the music world. Alternately, descriptions of the songs and the album in general may be included.	This Is Jan Howard Country (as of June 2020)
Start {{Start-Class}}	An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and lacks adequate reliable sources. It should have: An infobox. A lead section giving an overview of the album. A track listing. Reference to at least primary personnel by name (must specify performers on the current album; a band navbox is insufficient) Categorisation at least by artist and year.	Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more.	Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation.	Nadha (as of June 2020)
Stub {{Stub-Class}}	A very basic description of the album. Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a title and track listing.	Possibly useful to someone who is not familiar with the album, but may be useless to a reader who is passingly familiar with the album.	Editors should place a stub template at the bottom of the article, just above the categories (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Stub templates and categories). Focus should be on expanding the lead section, adding an infobox, and fleshing out the basic details of the album.	Breaking Sensation (as of June 2020)
List {{List-Class}}	Used for stand-alone list articles such as discographies, until such time as they have passed the FL review process and can be marked as Featured lists.	The organization of the list should be logical and useful to the reader.	The list should be organized and follow a logical format. Discography articles should follow the standards of WikiProject Discographies.	List of Excel demos (as of June 2020)

Note that there was an importance assessment for several years, but this was removed by consensus in early 2023. You may still find talk page tags that include importance=foo, but this is not functional.

Requesting an assessment

To get an article in the scope of WikiProject Albums assessed on quality, you may list a request.

1. Sounds of the Animal Kingdom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Article expanded beyond stub // Chchcheckit (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Scratch the Surface (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Article expanded Chchcheckit (talk) 20:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Devoured by the Mouth of Hell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Article expanded Chchcheckit (talk) 20:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Assessment log

An automatically generated log of assessments is available at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Album articles by quality log. Please don't change anything in the log manually.

Popular pages

List of top articles with the most frequent views, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Popular pages, updated monthly.