Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology/Assessment

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology
 Main Main Talk Article guide Article alerts Assessment Popular pages Recognized content Resources 
Index · Statistics · Log
Psychology articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA Other ??? Total
FA 3 4 12 19
FL 1 1 2
GA 5 14 27 69 10 125
B 27 176 297 290 84 874
C 28 322 1,069 1,843 1 409 3,672
Start 5 172 859 3,197 1 2,231 6,465
Stub 6 126 1,348 1,870 3,350
List 7 10 47 98 1 9 172
Category 2,844 2,844
Disambig 3 26 29
File 34 34
Portal 100 100
Project 23 23
Template 1 222 223
NA 7 42 139 675 863
Other 1 145 146
Assessed 72 711 2,472 7,001 4,071 1 4,613 18,941
Unassessed 1 9 1 354 365
Total 72 711 2,473 7,010 4,072 1 4,967 19,306
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 69,985 Ω = 4.82
Shortcut

This is the WikiProject Psychology article assessment page. Our assessments are based on the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, as part of their Work via WikiProjects initiative.

Instructions edit

Quality edit

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

{{WikiProject Psychology|class=???}}

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 psychology articles)  FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class psychology articles)  A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class psychology articles)  GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class psychology articles) B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class psychology articles) C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class psychology articles) Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class psychology articles) Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class psychology articles)  FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class psychology articles) List

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class psychology articles) Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class psychology articles) Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class psychology articles) Draft
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class psychology articles) File
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class psychology articles) Portal
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class psychology articles) Project
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class psychology articles) Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class psychology articles) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed psychology articles) ???

Importance edit

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Psychology}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Psychology|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 psychology articles)  Top 
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance psychology articles)  High 
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance psychology articles)  Mid 
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance psychology articles)  Low 
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance psychology articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance psychology articles)  ??? 

It is also possible to use |imp= for this purpose.

Grading scheme edit

Quality scale edit

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
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.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. 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;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. 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
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.[under discussion] Cleopatra
(as of June 2018)
 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:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. 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. List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events
(as of May 2018)
 A 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. Battle of Nam River
(as of June 2014)
 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:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. 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);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 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. Discovery of the neutron
(as of April 2019)
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
  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. 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.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
 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. Psychology
(as of January 2024)
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. Wing
(as of June 2018)
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:
  • 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. Ball
(as of September 2014)
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. Lineage (anthropology)
(as of December 2014)
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 literary movements

Importance scale edit

The article's importance, regardless of its quality

Top Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia
High Subject contributes a depth of knowledge
Mid Subject fills in more minor details
Low Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial


"DRAFT" WikiProject Psychology importance scale: The article's importance, regardless of its quality, particularly in terms of psychology's history, principles, scope, and methods.

Rate articles on overall importance. Use the basic descriptions, guided by the general examples when available. Always give the highest rating suggested by general examples at different levels.

DRAFT WikiProject Psychology importance scale
Class Description General examples Biography examples
Top Subject is a must-have for Category:Psychology and is considered a core topic. The article is a likely target for encyclopedic research. Psychologists and other experts in psychology will generally be well-versed on the topic, and many non-psychologists will likely have some familiarity with it. Intelligence Sigmund Freud[a]
High Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the field of psychology. Most experts in psychology will be familiar with the topic. The subject can be found in most academic studies of psychology, and a significant amount of published research exists for it. Schizophrenia
Mid Subject fills in more minor details but is still important to the field of psychology. Many psychologists are knowledgeable of the topic. Published research from a variety of sources exists for the subject. Big Five personality traits
Low Subject is peripheral knowledge to the field of psychology and possibly trivial but still notable. There may be limited research on the topic, or most professionals in psychology have not yet taken note of it. Liberation psychology
  1. ^ As of 3 Oct 2021, the only top-class biography


Hall of heroes edit

This is a space, created October 2021, to commemorate significant efforts in assessment.

  • Bibeyjj: added 6 October 2021, for getting quality assessments to 100% and maintaining it there. --Xurizuri (talk) 02:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also edit

Requesting an assessment or re-assessment edit

What you can accomplish here

This process is to find out whether your article is currently assessed at the correct quality level (Stub, Start, C, B) and correct importance (Low, Mid, High, Top). If you have significantly expanded an article and it is rated below B class, or if you feel the rating is otherwise incorrect, then please feel free to list it below.

What you can NOT accomplish here

  • If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, contact the volunteers at WT:PSYCH or list it at Peer review instead.
  • If you think the article is particularly well written, then you can nominate it as a possible Good article or even as a possible Featured article.

Add articles here! Newest requests on the BOTTOM, and remember to sign using ~~~~

List edit

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Psychology/Assessment&oldid=1219609373"