Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Comics! Here's what you need to know:

  • Every article in this project should have a quality rating and an importance rating. This helps editors track progress and find things that need work.
  • Ratings are stored on the talk page of the article in question.
  • This page lists the rating levels and what they mean.
  • Anyone can update a rating, except to give some high ratings like "good article" – these have more formal processes.
  • If you have worked on an article and would like someone to look at its rating, make a request on this page, or on Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Peer review. And if you want to help review other people's articles, see the list below or to to the Peer Review page.
  • This page also has some tools for finding incorrectly-assessed articles and for generating lists of articles by rating.

Each article in this project should have a quality rating and an importance rating. The quality rating is an estimate of how good the article is at describing its subject, looking at whether it covers the subject thoroughly, whether it is sourced by reliable sources, and so on. The importance rating is an estimate of how important the article is to the project, that is, how many readers might be interested and how core it is to understanding the subject of comics.

The ratings for each page appear on its Talk page in the {{WikiProject Comics}} project banner. This allows automatic analysis in tools like the WP 1.0 tool and places articles in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Comics articles by quality and Category:Comics articles by importance.

Quality assessmentEdit

Frequently asked questionsEdit

See also the general assessment FAQ
  1. What is the purpose of rating articles by quality? Monitoring quality allows the project to prioritize work on articles that need the most attention. It also lets the project know which could be promoted, for example, which articles could be worthy of being a featured article.
  2. Who can assess articles? Any member of WikiProject Comics 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.
  3. Can I assess an article I worked on? You can, as any member of the project can rank an article. However, it's best to get an independent view if you can. Consider submitting it for assessment on this page; if you don't get a reply from another editor then rank it yourself.
  4. What's the technical process for ranking an article? Go to the article's Talk page, and inside the {{WikiProject Comics}} template, add "|class=xxx", where "xxx" is your ranking. The page on the template has more details.
  5. How do I decide what rating an article is? 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. How can I ask for an article to be assessed? You can request an assessment lower down on this page. However, be aware that this assessment process has been largely inactive for some time, so you may not get a response. Alternatively, you can try the project's peer review department. If you aren't getting a response in either place, or if there is disagreement, you may want to take it to Wikipedia's general peer review.
  7. Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, reviewers may not have time to leave detailed comments. 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 have a number of options. You can list it in the section for assessment requests below, start a discussion on the article's talk page, or 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, 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. Is this department still active? As of November 2020, there is a backlog of assessment requests dating back to March 2019. As such, it does appear that the assessment department is mostly, if not completely, inactive. Remember, anyone can take on an assessment request so please feel free to participate.
  12. 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.

List of possible quality ratingsEdit

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

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

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

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

Quality scaleEdit

The scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

These criteria apply to general-content articles. The manual of Style guide provides additional sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.

Each comics-related article has its assessment included within the {{WikiProject Comics}} template, such as {{WikiProject Comics|class=B}}. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Comics articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.

List of requests for quality assessmentEdit

If you want an article's quality rating assessed or reassessed, especially if it's one you worked on, please add it to the list below.

  • Reviewers may or may not leave feedback on why they gave an article a certain rating, depending on time. If you want a full review of an article, use the WP:COMICS peer review process or the regular peer review process.
  • If you want to discuss an article's quality or how to improve it, it's best to do this on the article's talk page.
  • Seeking an A-class rating? We suggest you submit it for a Peer Review to allow us more time to respond and review. Be sure to first read what qualifies as an A rating before doing so though.
  • If you have a problem with getting an assessment, want to talk about a group of articles at once, or to discuss how ratings are done, ask on this project's Talk page.

If you assess an article, please strike it off using <s>Strike-through text</s> and note your rating here so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Thanks!

Past assessments are located on this page. If you delete a striked-through article from the list, please remember to put it in the archive.

Add new requests at the bottom.

  1. Hyperion (comics) - extensively reformatted, trimmed a lot of information. Namenamenamenamename (talk) 02:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
  2. Squadron Supreme - It hasn't been evaluated since 2007, as far as I can tell? It has changed so much since 2007. Namenamenamenamename (talk) 02:25, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
  3. Galactus - Page has not been assessed in some time and I don't believe the indicated disqualification against B status (referencing and citation criterion not met) applies.Mobb One (talk) 19:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
  4. Aventuras en el mundo del futuro - hoping a rewrite brings it up to C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 04:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
    • As it's been over a year with no reply, I have reranked this article myself, calling it C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  5. Small Saves - since its last assessment, there has been a detailed, independent article published that talks about the comic and the artist in more detail than any previous citation. I've incorporated it in, and gone over the article generally. I think this gets it to a C-class (substantial but is still missing important content) but not further, because there is enough information but there is a lack of citations for the description of the comic's subject matter. HenryCrun15 (talk) 22:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
    • As it's been over a year with no reply, I have reranked this article myself, calling it C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  6. Piled Higher and Deeper - I've substantially reworked this, including finding over half a dozen new secondary sources and better using the existing ones, restructuring the article, and separating primary sources (story notes) and secondary sources (references). It's currently Start-class, but I think it's at least C-class and might be up to B-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 00:52, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
    • As it's been over a year with no reply, I have reranked this article myself, calling it C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  7. Chris Crosby (comics) Substantially rewritten, with an aim to make it up-to-date and to ensure material is properly sourced. I've added a fair amount more information, but I'm concerned it still relies heavily on sources that may not be considered reliable. In any case I think it does reach C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 02:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
    • It's been three months without a reply to this request, so I have reranked the quality of the article myself. I think that the article meets the definition of C-class - "The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup." HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
  8. Cheshire Crossing I suspect this can't make a B grade with a large plot section that is entirely unsourced. But having changed a lot I think it could do with an independent review. HenryCrun15 (talk) 03:55, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
  9. Allie Brosh – Revisited after her new book generated more media coverage. I think this reaches B-class now; it is well sourced and covers the subject thoroughly. HenryCrun15 (talk) 03:34, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
  10. Christopher Hastings The article missed a lot of his work, and didn't describe (what is probably) his most well-known work in much detail. I think this is C-class now. HenryCrun15 (talk) 03:23, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
  11. Brad Neely – Details are scant on his comic work, but I think the article overall does reach C-class. HenryCrun15 (talk) 00:01, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
  12. Jerry Holkins – Updated, including with a highly detailed interview by a museum's oral history department. Still lacking a lot of detail though. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
  13. Raina Telgemeier While this still needs work, the latest version replaces a lot of primary sources with secondary ones, removes unsourced material from a BLP, updates the article to 2020, and restructures it especially in the reception section. Currently it's a Start; I think it's at least a C. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:49, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
  14. Sluggy Freelance – This article was a classic decade-old webcomic article, with piles of unsourced, highly-detailed, glowing material. The current version has far more secondary sources, presents a more balanced view of the comic, cuts down the fancruft, and marks what remains as needing sources. I think this is a C-class now, but probably no further. HenryCrun15 (talk) 00:04, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
  15. The Oatmeal I think this is B-class now. HenryCrun15 (talk) 20:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  16. Girly - Possibly makes C-class? HenryCrun15 (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
  17. Zach Weinersmith I believe this meets the criteria for B-class now as it thoroughly covers the subject with good sources. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:34, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
  18. Sarah's Scribbles – short, but covers the topic thoroughly. HenryCrun15 (talk) 03:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
  19. Nathan W. Pyle HenryCrun15 (talk) 00:53, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
  20. One-shot (comics) – Currently a Stub Class, but I have improved it and updated some information. Please re-assess it and I will keep working, thank you. SCP-0113 Lantern (talk) 20:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Hi there! I have rated this as a Start-class, though it is close to C-class. I have given a more detailed review on the talk page for the article. HenryCrun15 (talk) 03:03, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  21. Critical Role: Vox Machina Origins – Created in September 2020 & needs assessment. I think it's higher than Start-class. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 23:41, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Importance assessmentEdit

Frequently asked questionsEdit

See also the general assessment FAQ
  1. What is the purpose of rating articles by importance? Marking importance allows the project to prioritize work on articles that are key to the project's area.
  2. Who can assess articles? Any member of WikiProject Comics is free to add or change the importance 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.
  3. Can I rank or re-rank an article I worked on? You can, as any member of the project can rank an article. However, it's best to get an independent view if you can. Consider submitting it for assessment below; if you don't get a reply from another editor then rank it yourself.
  4. How do I decide the importance of an article? See the importance scale below to help you make your decision.
  5. What if I don't agree with a rating? You can list it below, discuss it on the article's Talk page, or ask any member of the project to rate the article again.
  6. 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!
  7. 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.
  8. 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.

Importance scaleEdit

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

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

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 Comics.

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.

List of requests for importance assessmentEdit

If you want an article's importance rating assessed or reassessed, especially if it's one you worked on, please add it to the list below.

  • Reviewers may or may not leave feedback on why they gave an article a certain rating, depending on time.
  • If you have a problem with getting an assessment, want to talk about a group of articles at once, or to discuss how ratings are done, ask on this project's Talk page.

If you assess an article, please strike it off using <s>Strike-through text</s> and note your rating here so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Thanks!

Past assessments are located on this page. If you delete a striked-through article from the list, please remember to put it in the archive.

Add new requests at the bottom.

  1. Raina Telgemeier – Given that her works have sold at least 18 million copies and she has won so many awards, I think this article is at least of Mid importance. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:49, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Incorrectly assessed pagesEdit

There are some automatic systems that try to identify incorrectly assessed pages. Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Comics articles and Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Comics articles output lists of these pages. Reasons for this include:

  • Invoked review parameter when the associated subpage doesn't exist, or missing review parameter it when it does
  • Invalid combination of review status and assessment class
  • Link to a portal subpage that doesn't exist
  • Use of a deprecated parameter (e.g. portal)
  • Assessed as NA-importance when the page is in the article namespace
    • Disambig and Redirect articles should be rated as No for importance
  • Assessed as No-importance when the page is not in the article namespace
    • Templates, Categories, Images and Portals should be rated as NA for importance
  • Assessed as having an importance when the page is not in the article namespace
  • Use of a deprecated parameter (e.g. image)
    • Future class has been deprecated

StatisticsEdit

As of 18 January 2021, there are 22,881 articles within the scope of WikiProject Comics, of which 68 are featured. This makes up 0.37% of the articles on Wikipedia and 0.72% of featured articles and lists. Including non-article pages, such as talk pages, redirects, categories, etcetera, there are 45,922 pages in the project.

Comics article rating and assessment scheme
(NB: Listing, Log & Stats are updated on a daily basis by a bot)
Daily log of status changes
Current Statistics

LogEdit

The log has now grown too large to transclude. Please see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Comics articles by quality log for full details.