Wikipedia:WikiProject Idaho/Assessment
| WikiProject Idaho |
|---|
.jpg) |
| Information |
| Idaho Portal • Changes |
Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Idaho! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Idaho related 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 Idaho}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Idaho articles by quality and Idaho articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. Index · Statistics · Log
As of 30 November 2024, there are 4,523 articles within the scope of WikiProject Idaho, of which 10 are featured and 22 are good articles. This makes up 0.07% of the articles on Wikipedia, 0.09% of all featured articles and lists, and 0.05% of all good articles. Including non-article pages, such as talk pages, redirects, categories, etc., there are 16,160 pages in the project.
Frequently asked questions
[edit]- 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 Idaho}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
- 3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Idaho}} 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 project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
- 4. Who can assess articles?
- Any member of WikiProject Idaho 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. Where can I get more comments about my article?
- The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
- 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. 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.
- 9. Aren't the ratings subjective?
- Yes, they are somewhat subjective (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!
- 10. How can I keep track of changes in article ratings?
- A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the statistics may be more accessible.
- 11. What if I have a question not listed here?
- If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.
Idaho articles by quality and importance
[edit]99.4% Quality assessed (based on articles with {{WikiProject Idaho}} template on talk page)
91% Importance assessed (based on articles with {{WikiProject Idaho}} template on talk page)
| Daily log of status changes | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Current Statistics | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Update table: update project data
Instructions
[edit]Quality assessment
[edit]An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Idaho}} 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 Idaho articles) |  FA |
|
| A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Idaho articles) |  A |
|
| GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Idaho articles) |  GA |
|
| B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Idaho articles) | B | |
| C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Idaho articles) | C | |
| Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Idaho articles) | Start | |
| Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Idaho articles) | Stub | |
| FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Idaho articles) | FL |
|
| List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Idaho articles) | List |
For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:
Quality scale
[edit]The scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.
| Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FA |
The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets 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.
|
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. | Boise National Forest |
| FL |
The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
|
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. | List of governors of Idaho |
| FM |
Pictures that have attained featured picture status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. More detailed criteria
A featured picture:
|
The page contains a featured image, sound clip or other media-related content. | Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. | File:Advanced Test Reactor.jpg |
| GA |
The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria
A good article is:
|
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. | USS Idaho (BB-42) |
| B | 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. More detailed criteria
|
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. | Idaho |
| C | 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. | Pocatello, Idaho |
| Start | 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:
|
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. | Albertsons |
| Stub | 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. | Puppetoon |
| List | 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. | List of people from Idaho |
| Category | Any category falls under this class. | Categories are mainly used to group together articles within a particular subject area. | Large categories may need to be split into one or more subcategories. Be wary of articles that have been miscategorized. | Category:Idaho |
| Disambig | Any disambiguation page falls under this class. | 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. | Idaho (disambiguation) |
| File | Any page in the file namespace falls under this class. | The page contains an image, a sound clip or other media-related content. | Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. | File:Sawtooth_Valley_ID1.jpg |
| Portal | Any page in the portal namespace falls under this class. | Portals are intended to serve as "main pages" for specific topics. | Editor involvement is essential to ensure that portals are kept up to date. | Portal:Idaho |
| Project | All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class. | Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development. | Develop these pages into collaborative resources that are useful for improving articles within the project. | Wikipedia:WikiProject Idaho/Featured content |
| Redirect | Any redirect falls under this class. | The page redirects to another article with a similar name, related topic or that has been merged with the original article at this location. | Editor involvement is essential to ensure that articles are not mis-classified as redirects, and that redirects are not mis-classified as articles. | Interstate 15 (Idaho) |
| Template | 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. | Template:Idaho |
| NA | Any non-article page that fits no other classification. | The page contains no article content. | Look out for misclassified articles. Currently, many NA-class articles may need to be re-classified. | N/A |
These criteria apply to general-content articles. The style guide provides additional sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.
Each Idaho-related article has its assessment included within the {{WikiProject Idaho}} template, such as {{WikiProject Idaho|class=B}}. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Idaho articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.
Importance assessment
[edit]An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Idaho}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Idaho|importance=???}}
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 Idaho articles) | Top | |
| High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Idaho articles) | High | |
| Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Idaho articles) | Mid | |
| Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Idaho articles) | Low | |
| NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Idaho articles) | NA | |
| ??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Idaho articles) | ??? |
Importance scale
[edit]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 students of Idaho.
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.
| Importance | Criteria | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Top | This article is of the utmost importance to the project, as it provides key information about a major topic that is fundamental to a study of the subject. Core topics about Idaho. Generally, these topics are sub-articles of the main Idaho article, vital for the understanding of Idaho or extremely notable to people outside of the Idaho field. This category should stay limited to approximately 100 members. Biographies should be limited to the top one or two people in a particular field or persons of the greatest historical importance. | Idaho |
| High | This article is very important to the project, as it covers either a general area of knowledge or provides information about a significant topic. Topics that are reasonably notable within the field of Idaho without necessarily being famous or very notable outside the Idaho field. | Sawtooth National Forest |
| Mid | This article is relatively important to the project, as it provides more specific knowledge of areas that a serious reader would need to understand. Topics that are very notable within the field of Idaho, and well-known outside of it, and can be reasonably expected to be included in any print encyclopedia. | 2016 Famous Idaho Potato Bowl |
| Low | This article is significant but has limited importance to the project, as it expands the reader's overall knowledge of the subject into areas of general interest. Topics of mostly local interest or those that are only included for complete coverage or as examples of a higher-level topic; peripheral or trivial topics or topics that have only a limited connection to the subject of Idaho. | Lin Whitworth |
| Bottom | Subject is of the lowest level of relevance or significance to its field of study. This article has no real significance to the project, but it covers additional topics of general or specific interest, some of which could be described as trivia, though all are notable in their own right. Others may be articles of high importance to another project that have an indirect connection with Idaho. The category was created by the WikiProject to counter-balance "top importance" and to place "mid-importance" into the actual middle. In addition it serves to separate trivia from articles of low but significant importance. | Cutthroat trout |
| NA | Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. | Category:Idaho |
| ??? | 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 rating for it, please feel free to list it below. Please note that an importance rating may not be given in some cases if the reviewer is unfamiliar with the subject.
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!
Submit new requests here:
- Boise, Idaho is ready to be re-assessed. Mjquinn_id (talk) 21:33, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Past assessments are located here. If you delete a striked-through article from the list, please remember to put it in the archive.
Incorrectly assessed pages
[edit]Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Idaho articles list pages which have been incorrectly assessed. Reasons for this include:
- Invalid combination of review status and assessment class
- Link to a portal subpage that doesn't exist
- Assessed as NA-importance when the page is in the article namespace
- Pages should be rated as NA for importance
- Assessed as having an importance when the page is not in the article namespace
Log
[edit]The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; due to its size (ca 100 kB), it cannot be transcluded directly.
Popular pages
[edit]Popular pages: List of top articles with the most frequent views, updated monthly.
- ^ 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.
