Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Amusement Parks!
This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's amusement park articles and their relative importance to the project. While much of the work is performed in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, article assessment ratings are used within the project itself to aid in the recognition of excellent contributions and in the identification of topics that need further improvements.
class – valid values are listed in the custom class mask. See the project's quality scale for details. Setting an explicit value of NA is rarely necessary; for this, either leave |class= blank or omit the parameter.
herschend-importance (only used if |herschend=yes is set; uses the same values as |importance=) – Importance rating within Herschend Family Entertainment task force
hersheypark-importance (only used if |hersheypark=yes is set; uses the same values as |importance=) – Importance rating within Hersheypark task force (inactive)
Imagedetails (appears only if |Imageneeded=yes is set) – Additional details to describe the image that is requested.
importance – valid values are listed in the custom importance mask. See the project's importance scale for details. Setting an explicit value of NA is rarely necessary; for this, either leave |importance= blank or omit the parameter.
listas – This parameter, which is the equivalent of the DEFAULTSORT sortkey that should be placed on all biographical articles, is a sortkey for the article talk page (e.g. for Ron Toomer, use |listas=Toomer, Ron so that the talk page will show up in the T's and not the R's of the various assessment and administrative categories). This is important because it is one source used by those who set DEFAULTSORT on the article; consider also setting the DEFAULTSORT for the article when setting this parameter. For more information about this, please see Wikipedia:Categorization of people § Ordering names in a category. If the article is using {{WikiProject banner shell}} then it is preferable to add |listas= to that template instead of a project banner template. Putting the parameter on more than one template is not required.
seaworld-importance (only used if |seaworld=yes is set; uses the same values as |importance=) – Importance rating within SeaWorld Entertainment task force
universal-importance (only used if |universal=yes is set; uses the same values as |importance=) – Importance rating within Universal Parks & Resorts task force
category – set |category=no if, and only if, a banner is being used for demonstration or testing purposes, to prevent unnecessary or undesirable categorization. Otherwise, omit this parameter.
The parameters |disneyland= and |wdw= are recognised as aliases for |disney=. If more than one is present, |disneyland= has precedence over |wdw=, and |disney= has precedence over both of the others: parameters with lower precedence are ignored.
The parameters |disneyland-importance= and |wdw-importance= are recognised as aliases for |disney-importance=. If more than one is present, |disneyland-importance= has precedence over |wdw-importance=, and |disney-importance= has precedence over both of the others: parameters with lower precedence are ignored.
The parameter |Hersheypark-importance= is recognised as an alias for |hersheypark-importance=. If both |hersheypark-importance= and |Hersheypark-importance= are present, |Hersheypark-importance= is ignored.
The parameters |imageneeded=, |Photoneeded= and |photoneeded= are recognised as aliases for |Imageneeded=. If more than one is present, the order of precedence, from highest to lowest, is: |Imageneeded= → |imageneeded= → |Photoneeded= → |photoneeded= . Parameters with lower precedence are ignored.
The parameter |UK= is recognised as an alias for |uk=. If both |uk= and |UK= are present, |UK= is ignored.
The parameter |UK-importance= is recognised as an alias for |uk-importance=. If both |uk-importance= and |UK-importance= are present, |UK-importance= is ignored.
Anyone is free to add or change the rating of an article.
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 specific questions, you can ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Amusement Parks}} 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):
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;
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
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.
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.
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.
(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.
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.
Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items.
No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.
The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history).
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting.
Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help.
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);
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication.
Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.
The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.
A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines.
The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup.
More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.
Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.
An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
A 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
Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more.
Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use.
A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria.
Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant.
Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant.
Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area.
There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader.
Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized.
The page serves to distinguish multiple articles that share the same (or similar) title.
Additions should be made as new articles of that name are created. Pay close attention to the proper naming of such pages, as they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title.
Any template falls under this class. The most common types of templates include infoboxes and navboxes.
Different types of templates serve different purposes. Infoboxes provide easy access to key pieces of information about the subject. Navboxes are for the purpose of grouping together related subjects into an easily accessible format, to assist the user in navigating between articles.
Infoboxes are typically placed at the upper right of an article, while navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page. Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information.
The following is a guide for assigning importance within WikiProject Amusement Parks. The process is somewhat subjective. Click the importance grade in the left column to view articles within this WikiProject that have that designation.
Subject is a crucial aspect of amusement parks, and its relationship to the industry would be mentioned in a print encyclopedia. This designation is typically reserved for subjects that have gained international notability and historical significance.
Subject is somewhat notable to experts within the field, but it only fills in minor details to aid in the field's understanding. Non-experts lack familiarity with the subject, and its impact on the industry has been modest.
This designation may tend to apply to:
Topics that are well-known mainly among enthusiasts
Topics that lack significant national coverage
Rides and attractions that are somewhat known outside of their locale but not significantly
Rides and attractions that have not set any enduring records or milestones
People with less significant contributions that may or may not have lasting, historical relevance
Subject is somewhat trivial and may only serve as a minor extension of a larger topic. It has had little, if any, impact on the industry as a whole. Many experts within the field may have little to no familiarity with the subject.
This designation may tend to apply to:
Topics with enough coverage in reliable sources to meet WP:GNG but very little in comparison to "Mid" importance
Topics that are not well-known outside of their locale, as evidenced in reliable sources
Rides and attractions that have set no records or milestones
People whose contributions have not achieved lasting, historical significance and/or lack strong ties to the amusement industry
Subject has the lowest level of significance or no real significance to the project as a whole. It may be an entity, such as a brand or hotel, that has some form of financial or marketing relationship within the amusement park industry. Its significance may also be solely tied to a task force within the project.
If you have created a new article or made significant changes to one, and are seeking another editor's opinion on its assessment, feel free to list it below in the form of:
* {{Article|articlename}} --~~~~.
Note that requesting assistance here is not required. Any editor who feels comfortable doing so may assess or re-assess an article on their own. It is recommended to use the charts above as a reference. Also, you may leave brief comments below when performing an assessment for others, but extensive commentary is best left at the article's talk page. WikiProject members should help keep the list below tidy by periodically removing old entries in the list that have been assessed.
Important: If you assess an article listed below, please indicate Done, as well as the result, and strike it off the list so that others are aware.
Demon (roller coaster) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - I've been working on this article for ~5 months (and have added 37 sources in that time, as well as over doubling the article length) and I would like an unbiased opinion on its quality - I'd like it to be reassessed. Any feedback would be very welcome as well! I'll ping @Adog because the last person didn't and their article hasn't been reassessed yet after 9 months. Thanks in advance! - Plighting Engineerd (talk) 04:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done Start to C class. Good deal of work into the article (the graphic made was a nice touch). More information is good. There are a couple of missing sources, and could use the addition of more content from independent web-based sources (I would suggest doing a deep dive into the Newspapers.com archive or local newspaper coverage, less of enthusiast sources/YouTube/Official website where possible). Adog (Talk・Cont) 00:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
