Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago/Assessment
Welcome to the assessment department of the Chicago WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing and recording the quality and the importance of Wikipedia's Chicago or Chicagoland articles. There are two parameters within the Chicago Project template used for recording the assessments. The Importance parameter records the importance rating and the Class parameter is used for the quality value. 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, or by other editors and readers, to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying articles in need of further work. A reader may use the parameters to decide which articles to read if they were interested in the general topic Chicago or Chicagoland.
An example of how the assessment parameters are used - Filling in the rating in the Class parameter of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Chicago articles by quality and filing in the rating in the Importance parameter will place the article within the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Chicago articles by importance. These two lists serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist offered to the Chicago Project members by the WP:1.0 project team.
Frequently asked questions
[edit]- 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 Chicago 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!
- How may I begin assessing articles?
- Assessment may be done through a variety of ways, but the most efficient is through use of the MetaData[dead link] article assessment script.
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.
Introduction to assessing a Chicago article
[edit]Assessing a Chicago Project article involves reviewing and recording (1) the quality of the article (i.e., how well it is written) as well as (2) the importance of the subject of the article as it pertains to the scope of the Project and the subjective criteria established by the Project team members.
An article's quality assessment is recorded within the Class parameter of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid Class is not provided are given in a category based list called Category:Unassessed Chicago articles. For the latest count of Chicago Project articles needing quality assessment (e.g., that need to have a quality value inserted in the Class parameter of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} template) see the information given below at #Statistics or view the Category:Unassessed Chicago articles which will give the current count just before the alphabetical listing.
An article's importance assessment is recorded within the Importance parameter of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid Importance is not provided are given in a category based list called Category:Unknown-importance Chicago articles. For the latest count of Chicago Project articles needing importance assessment (e.g., that need to have an importance value inserted in the Importance parameter of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} template) see the information given below at #Statistics or view the Category:Unknown-importance Chicago articles which will give the current count just before the alphabetical listing.
If an article is within the scope of the Chicago Project group and the Talk page for the article doesn't have a Chicago Project template, a copy the entire text given within one of the boxes below should be pasted at the top of the Talk page of the article.
{{WikiProject Chicago
|class = <!--FA/A/GA/B/C/Start/Stub/FL/List/NA/FM/Disambig/Redirect; other namespaces don't require class-->
|importance = <!--Top/High/Mid/Low/NA-->
|attention = <!--yes or remove it-->
|needs-infobox = <!--yes or remove it-->
|needs-photo = <!--yes or remove it-->
|auto =
|category =
|listas =
}}
or
{{WikiProject Chicago |class= |importance= }}
Chicago Project articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} template on their talk page, but the template may be incomplete. First, give yourself access to the MetaData[dead link] article assessment script by following the instructions at MetaData[dead link]. Next, select an article from the list at Category:Unassessed Chicago articles or Category:Unknown-importance Chicago articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{WikiProject Chicago}} template. Finally, select the appropriate answers for the MetaData[dead link] script. You will be brought to the talk page where you may complete the assessment.
Class parameter
[edit]An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Chicago}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):
| FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Chicago articles) |  FA |
|
| A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Chicago articles) |  A |
|
| GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Chicago articles) |  GA |
|
| B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Chicago articles) | B | |
| C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Chicago articles) | C | |
| Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Chicago articles) | Start | |
| Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Chicago articles) | Stub | |
| FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Chicago articles) | FL |
|
| List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Chicago articles) | List |
For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:
Importance parameter
[edit]An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Chicago}} project banner on its talk page:
The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):
| Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Chicago articles) | Top | |
| High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Chicago articles) | High | |
| Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Chicago articles) | Mid | |
| Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Chicago articles) | Low | |
| NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Chicago articles) | NA | |
| ??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Chicago articles) | ??? |
- Please follow a two step process to classify an article as "Top-importance": (1) Set a "placeholder" High-importance value (this will be there until Chicago Project Team consensus is obtained); and, (2) Add your article to the suggestions (you may want to add the page to your watchlist, so you can look for feedback). After consensus is obtained, a Chicago Project Team member will set the Top-importance value.
Assessment scales
[edit]The following scales provide the Chicago Project assessment criteria for the Quality and Importance parameters.
Quality scale
[edit]WikiProject Chicago article quality grading scheme (click show to view)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Importance scale
[edit]Only the "Top" 0.2% (or 45 as of May 2010) Chicago and Chicagoland related articles.
Importance is a relative term. Importance values are applied within the project. This evaluation reflects the perceived importance to this project and/or work groups that the article falls under. An article judged to be of "Top-importance" to one project may be only "Mid-importance" to another project. The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, it is an 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). A good indicator for a high level of public interest is if a large number of different editors have contributed to the page.
These ratings do not reflect the general importance of an article from a cultural or social perspective. For example, the most viewed pages on the internet or on Wikipedia do not mesh with conventional views on importance. Sometimes celebrity, or the popularity of the article's subject matter, may have more of a bearing on the importance assessment than conventional importance. As a result, several individuals may have a higher importance than our own mayor, for example.
| Importance | Criteria | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Top | Do not give this rating to any Chicago Project article without first getting Project team consensus. Subject matter is a must-have for any encyclopedia, and would be highly associated with Chicago or Chicagoland. Examples would be certain Hall of Fame athletes, world class institutions, important national politicians, world class buildings or structures, or must-see tourist attractions. For instance, Michael Jordan is rated Top-importance because as an elite basketball player in Chicago, his accomplishments have also affected and inspired people worldwide. On the other hand, an athlete who plays briefly in Chicagoland before going on to a Hall of Fame career does not count. An example of this would be Dominik Hasek, who has been honored extensively for his hockey accomplishments, but has played for several teams after the Blackhawks. The subject's role as a Chicagoan or person associated with Chicagoland must also be emphasized. This is easily seen at President Barack Obama, who even though he was born in Hawaii, his article is rated Mid-importance by the Hawaii WikiProject and Top-importance by the Chicago WikiProject. (Note that since this project covers all of Cook County and Chicagoland related articles, the words "Chicago" and "Chicagoland" may be used interchangeably in this documentation.) | Chicago |
| High | Must have had (1) a large impact on Chicagoans and an impact on non-Chicagoans, across a couple of generations in a role as a person associated with Chicagoland or as a Chicagoland institution, or (2) a prominent national and/or international role that had a large impact on non-Chicagoans and an impact on Chicagoans. Subject contributes a depth of knowledge. Examples would be National Register of Historic Places listings in Chicago, any currently serving U.S. Congressmen from Chicagoland, important Chicago athletes, or important institutions. | Chicago Board of Trade Building |
| Mid | Must have had a role that was (1) important to Chicagoans as a person or institution associated with Chicagoland, (2) a prominent national and/or international role that had a large impact on non-Chicagoans, but a limited role to Chicagoans, (3) of moderate local, national and/or international importance. Subject fills in more minor details. Examples would be interesting buildings, personalities or architectural elements, or nationally prominent individuals who did not play a significant role as Chicagoans before rising to such prominence. Many current and recent statewide elected Illinois politicians would fall under type (3), unless they rose from prominent Chicago positions. | Hillary Clinton |
| Low | Subject is notable to select Chicagoans for its role as a person or institution associated with Chicagoland. Subject is not particularly notable or significant to a wider range of readers. Examples would be (1) other buildings and narrow topics, (2) professional athletes of moderate importance who briefly played in Chicago, or (3) alumni of local colleges and universities that have become notable for non-Chicago related roles. Note: Persons may be listed in Chicago related categories due to their place of birth, place where they were reared as youths, place where they were educated (high school, college, graduate school), place where they performed their notable service/acts, or place where they resided as adults. Generally, an article subject notable enough to merit a biographical Wikipedia entry is a role model (albeit positive or negative) for many who are current and recent students of the institution of which they are an alumnus, and who have an interest in that particular field of notability. For example, notable politicians may be important to law students, and/or government and history majors; Wall Street chieftains may be important to business school students, and/or economics and finance majors; and famous scientists may be important to medical students and/or other science majors. However, alumni of local colleges and universities who have not stayed in the Chicago area will be of less importance to the project and thus have a lower "Importance" rating than "people from the Chicago area" who are more likely to have roots in the region and/or have stayed in the area. | Smith Museum of Stained Glass Windows |
| NA | Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. | Category:Chicago |
| ??? | Subject importance has not yet been assessed. | ??? |
Requesting an assessment
[edit]If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for it, please feel free to list it below. NOTE: This is only to rate the article on quality - you may or may not get feedback on the article. If you assess an article, please strike it off using <s>Strike-through text</s> so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Thanks! Generally, articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B', unless they are already rated as 'GA' by Wikipedia:Good articles/Candidates.
You may bring to our attention an article that has either not received any Importance rating or that you believe has been incorrectly assessed. List the article below. If it has been previously assessed (incorrectly in your opinion) also 1.) state its current assessment level, 2.) check its talk page edit history to find the assessor and state it here (it is better to get a new assessor for reassessment), 3) summarize why you feel the assessment is not correct.
Quality Assessment Requests
[edit]Importance Assessment Requests
[edit]Statistics
[edit]Current status
[edit]| Chicago articles by quality and importance | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | |||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Other | ??? | Total | |
| FA
|
3 | 3 | 24 | 60 | 90 | |||
| FL
|
1 | 4 | 8 | 14 | 27 | |||
| FM
|
60 | 60 | ||||||
| GA
|
6 | 13 | 103 | 356 | 50 | 528 | ||
| B | 20 | 38 | 250 | 705 | 1 | 325 | 1,339 | |
| C | 25 | 47 | 363 | 2,618 | 1 | 1,339 | 4,393 | |
| Start | 4 | 55 | 781 | 8,719 | 3 | 1 | 6,949 | 16,512 |
| Stub | 15 | 252 | 5,401 | 7,667 | 13,335 | |||
| List | 5 | 1 | 38 | 130 | 22 | 73 | 269 | |
| Category | 820 | 4 | 824 | |||||
| Disambig | 19 | 19 | ||||||
| File | 193 | 193 | ||||||
| Portal | 11 | 11 | ||||||
| Project | 8 | 8 | ||||||
| Redirect | 1 | 10 | 96 | 107 | ||||
| Template | 312 | 312 | ||||||
| NA | 6 | 6 | ||||||
| Other | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| Assessed | 64 | 176 | 1,820 | 18,013 | 1,553 | 5 | 16,403 | 38,034 |
| Unassessed | 1 | 13 | 549 | 563 | ||||
| Total | 65 | 176 | 1,820 | 18,026 | 1,553 | 5 | 16,952 | 38,597 |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 185,211 | Ω = 5.12 | ||||||
Historical counts
[edit]Assessment log
[edit]Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Chicago articles by quality log Note: This is a report generated by the WP:1.0 project team that uses their own project's criteria for "quality" which incorporates both Chicago Project assessment parameters of Class and Importance . CAUTION: In order to understand the report, as of August 29, 2009, the reader needs to realize that the report uses the term "Class" for both Class and Importance. An article's Importance parameter is reported as "Class" within parenthesis (e.g., (High-Class) ) and the quality parameter Class is reported as "Class" without the parenthesis (e.g., B-Class).
Current Top-importance Candidates
[edit]The list below are the Top Importance articles that had passed the suggestion and discussion phase of the process whereby Chicago Project articles as assigned a Top Importance value. These articles will be used during the ballot vote phase of the process. The next ballot is expected to occur in late 2010.
- Walter Payton
- George Halas
- Chicago Blackhawks
- Museum Campus
- United Airlines
- Playboy
- Cyrus McCormick
- William Wrigley Jr.
- Leopold and Loeb
- Skidmore, Owings and Merrill
- The Jungle
- John Hancock Center
- The Blues Brothers (film)
- Chicago Water Tower
- Michelle Obama
- Donald Rumsfeld
- List of Registered Historic Places in Cook County, Illinois
- Shedd Aquarium
See past ballots. Make suggested additions to the above list on the talk page.
Next to be promoted in order:
Other possible promotions in order:
Votes
[edit]Voting has ended
- ^ For example, this image of the Battle of Normandy is grainy, but very few pictures of that event exist. However, where quite a number of pictures exist, for instance, the moon landing, FPC attempts to select the best of the ones produced.
- ^ An image has more encyclopedic value (often abbreviated to "EV" or "enc" in discussions) if it contributes strongly to a single article, rather than contributing weakly to many. Adding an image to numerous articles to gain EV is counterproductive and may antagonize both FPC reviewers and article editors.
- ^ While effects such as black and white, sepia, oversaturation, and abnormal angles may be visually pleasing, they often detract from the accurate depiction of the subject.
