Wikipedia:WikiProject Anglicanism/Assessment

Article rating and assessment scheme edit

WikiProject Anglicanism article rating and assessment scheme
Listing, Log & Stats are updated semiweekly by a bot
Current detailed listing of Anglicanism articles by quality
Daily log of status changes
Current Statistics Rated article Categories

An article rating and assessment scheme has been implemented for articles identified as being of interest to WikiProject Anglicanism. In this scheme, Anglicanism-related articles ('article' here also includes lists) may be assigned:

  • a particular rating which indicates an assessment of their class (overall quality), and
  • a particular rating which indicates an assessment of their importance (priority or relative significance).

The primary purpose of this rating and assessment scheme is to provide project members and editors with a sub-categorised survey of the current status of Anglicanism-related articles, which can then be used to prioritise the overall workload and highlight articles needing improvements at various stages.

For example, higher-priority articles (those most essential to any encyclopaedia) in need of most work (i.e. lower quality) can be readily identified for attention and collaboration.

There will be a number of secondary benefits from the scheme, such as being able to track which kinds and topics of articles are 'neglected'.

This assessment and rating scheme follows the precepts adopted by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, see Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment and Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Work via Wikiprojects for details.

The class and anglicanism-importance ratings are recorded by setting appropriate values to the parameters of the Project banner, {{ChristianityWikiProject|anglicanism=yes}}, which is placed on the corresponding talk pages of in-scope Anglicanism-related articles.

See the Quality scale for guideline criteria for rating an article by class/quality. See the Importance scale for guideline criteria for rating an article by importance/priority.

The assessments of class and anglicanism-importance are assigned manually by WP Anglicanism project members – see the Rating instructions for details. Assigning a rating will automatically place the article in an appropriate rating category.

Once assigned, behind the scenes a bot runs periodically which compiles a variety of listings, statistics and log data, which can then later be analysed by the Project. See the above table for links to these auto-generated and updated pages, and the associated by quality and by importance categories.

It is expected that this rating and assessment scheme will require periodic and iterative maintenance, as new articles are created or identified, and existing articles are progressively improved (or, hopefully much rarer, demoted), requiring the status to be reassessed.

Of course, anyone is free to edit any of the articles they choose without regard to priority, however it is hoped that this will provide some basis for a more methodical approach to the longer-term overall improvement of content and coverage in the field.

Instructions edit

Anglicanism WikiProject
General information
Main project page talk
Christianity project page talk
Participants talk
Project category talk
Assessment talk
Collaboration talk
Articles needing attention talk
Article requests/to-do talk
{{User Anglicanism WikiProject}}
edit · recent Anglican-related changes

An article's assessment is recorded via the use of certain parameters of the {{ChristianityWikiProject}} project banner, which is affixed to the talk pages of in-scope articles.

The three parameters used for this exercise are anglicanism=yes (indicates the article's inclusion in the project), class (indicates an assessment of the article's current overall quality), and anglicanism-importance (indicates an assessment of the relative priority or significance of the particular article to general knowledge of Anglicanism-related topics). Usage summary (note the parameters are in lowercase):


These parameters flag the article according to the values chosen (which then appear on the project banner), and also assign the article to a corresponding category. The possible values of these parameters and guidance criteria on which value to choose are detailed below: see Importance scale for the anglicanism-importance parameter and Quality scale for the class parameter.

The general workflow is as follows:

  1. Locate an in-scope Anglicanism-related article (or list), add the {{ChristianityWikiProject|class=?|anglicanism=yes|anglicanism-importance=?}} project banner to its talk page if not already there. This also applies to new articles you may create, you can add the banner and the rating.
  2. If currently unassessed (or when adding the project banner), determine what its class and importance assessment rating should be, using your judgment and the criteria given here. Try to be as frank as possible in the assessment, the aim here is to appropriately identify articles needing later improvement and there's nothing to be gained by "over-ranking" them.
  3. Add the selected parameter values to the project banner template call, per the specified syntax. Once previewed/saved, you should see the values updated in the banner and the appropriate categories assigned.
  4. If in doubt as to the appropriate class or importance level, you can either leave the value unassigned for now and/or consult with another project member to decide.
  5. If the article already has a rating, but you disagree or the article has subsequently been edited by you or someone else so that its overall quality has changed, then you can update the parameter yourself to reflect its new status.
  6. On an ongoing basis, you can patrol the various categories for improvement opportunities and also the unassessed articles for new assessments.

Importance scale edit

The following values may be used for the anglicanism-importance parameter (they should be entered exactly as given):

Importance parameter values (Category:Anglicanism articles by importance)
Value Meaning Examples Category
"Key" articles, considered indispensable Archbishop of Canterbury, Anglicanism Top-importance Anglicanism articles
High-priority topics and needed subtopics of "key" articles, often with a broad scope; needed to complement any general understanding of the field Lancelot Andrewes, History of the Church of England High-importance Anglicanism articles
Mid-priority articles on more specialised (sub-)topics; possibly more detailed coverage of topics summarised in "key" articles, and as such their omission would not significantly impair general understanding Vestments controversy, Broad church Mid-importance Anglicanism articles
While still notable, these are highly specialised or even obscure, not essential for understanding the wider picture ("nice to have" articles) Parish of the Falkland Islands, See of Rome Act 1536 Low-importance Anglicanism articles

The anglicanism-importance parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. If the importance parameter is not yet set, or contains an invalid value, the article will be assigned to Category:Unknown-importance Anglicanism articles.

Quality scale edit

Each article may also be assigned to a particular class, intended as a point-in-time assessment of its overall "quality" - relative to the criteria given in the quality scale which is detailed below. The following values may be used for the class parameter (they should be entered exactly as given):

Class parameter values (Category:Anglicanism articles by quality)
Label Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
The article has attained Featured article status.
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.

  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. Elizabeth I of England
(as of December 2008)
The article has attained Featured list status.
More detailed criteria
The article must meet 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.
List of Church of England dioceses
(as of December 2008)
The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere.
More detailed 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 matter would typically find nothing wanting. Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help. Jesus
(as of December 2008)
The article has attained Good article status.
More detailed criteria
The article must meet the good article 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 (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. 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. English Reformation
(as of December 2008)
The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach Good Article standards. B-Class articles should meet the six B-Class criteria.
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 does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. 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.
No reader should be 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, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the manual of style and related style guidelines. Henry VIII of England
(as of December 2008)
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup.
More detailed criteria
The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.
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 address cleanup issues. style="font-size:90%; text-align:center;" Exeter Cathedral
(as of June 2008)
An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria
The article has a usable amount of good content, but it is weak in many areas, usually in referencing. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide enough sources to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.
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. Rural Dean
(as of December 2008)
A very basic description of the topic.
More detailed criteria
The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible.
Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. Gayle Elizabeth Harris
(as of December 2008)
Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, 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 Archbishops of Canterbury (as of January 2009)
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. Doubling
(as of October 2008)
Any template falls under this class. The most common types of template include infoboxes and navboxes. Different types of template serve different purposes. Infoboxes provide easy access to key pieces of infomation 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:Anglicanism
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:Anglicanism
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:Anglicanism
Any non-article page that fits no other classification. The page contains no article content, and is probably not useful to any casual reader. Look out for mis-classified articles. Currently many NA-class articles need to be re-classified.

This project uses additional grades not listed above, such as Image. Articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed by default in Category:Unassessed Anglicanism articles.