Open main menu
Blue flag waving.svg

Article assessment involves determining the quality and importance of articles of interest to WikiProject Conservatism. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.The article review processes provide constructive criticism which is used by editors to improve articles. We're happy to assess your new article as well as developed articles.

Request assessmentEdit

To request an assessment of your new or developed article click here:

If you would like an outside opinion on a new quality and/or importance rating for your article, please feel free click the button. This will result in an assessment rating of Stub, Start, C or B.

Request assessment

OverviewEdit

The assessment system used by the WikiProject Conservatism to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assess lists and similar non-prose articles.

Prose article List article
Stub The first stage of an article's evolution is called a stub. A stub is an extremely short article that provides a basic description of the topic at best; it includes very little meaningful content, and may be little more than a dictionary definition. At this stage, it is often impossible to determine whether the topic should be covered by a prose article or a list, so this assessment level is shared between the two scales.
Start List A stub that undergoes some development will progress to the next stage of article evolution. An article at this stage provides some meaningful content, but is typically incomplete and lacks adequate references, structure, and supporting materials. At this stage, it becomes possible to distinguish between prose articles and lists; depending on its form, an article at this level will be assessed as a Start-Class prose article or a List-Class list.
C As the article continues to develop, it will reach the C-Class level. At this stage, the article is reasonably structured and contains substantial content and supporting materials, but may still be incomplete or poorly referenced, but not both. As articles progress to this stage, the assessment process begins to take on a more structured form, and specific criteria are introduced against which articles are rated. The article meets at least one of the B-Class criteria.
B An article that reaches the B-Class level is complete in content and structure, adequately referenced, and includes reasonable supporting materials; overall, it provides a satisfactory encyclopedic presentation of the topic for the average reader, although it might not be written to the standard that would be expected by an expert. Articles at this stage commonly undergo peer review to solicit ideas for further improvement. B-Class is the final assessment level that can be reached without undergoing a formal review process, and is a reasonable goal for newer editors.
  GA After reaching the B-Class level, an article may be submitted for assessment as a good article. Good articles must meet a set of criteria similar to those required for the B-Class assessment level, and must additionally undergo the formal good article review process.
  A   AL A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for the A-Class assessment level. An A-Class article presents a complete and thorough encyclopedic treatment of a subject, such as might be written by an expert in the field; the only deficiencies permissible at this level are minor issues of style or language. To receive an A-Class rating, a candidate article must undergo the formal A-Class review process. The A-Class rating is the highest assessment level that may be assigned by an individual WikiProject; higher assessment levels are granted only by Wikipedia-wide independent assessment processes.
  FA   FL The featured article and featured list ratings represent the pinnacle of article evolution and the best that Wikipedia has to offer; an article at this level is professional, outstanding, and represents a definitive source for encyclopedic information. Featured status is assigned only through a thorough independent review process; this process can be grueling for the unprepared, and editors are highly advised to submit articles for A-Class review prior to nominating them for featured status.


Importance scale

How to assess an articleEdit

  • Assess the article using the quality and importance schemes above.
  • Once assessed add {{WikiProject Conservatism|class=|importance=}} to the Talk page with the correct parameters.
  • Edit the Talk page to add a comment about why you rated the article the way you did. Please sign and date your comment with ~~~~.
  • The Rater tool can assist with article assessment. Another tool is the Kingbotk plugin for AutoWikiBrowser.

See below for assessing specific quality types


Stub

Stubs are assessed using Individual Review, and the author is free to assess the article. If the article is assessed better than a stub but it has a stub template, remove the stub template(s) from the article. Currently there are no conservatism stub templates, identification of stubs is accomplished by setting class=stub in the banner. This categorizes article talk pages into Category:Stub-Class Conservatism articles. Politics stub templates can also be useful. The stub for a politician is {{Poli-bio-stub}} and a political organization is {{poli-org-stub}}. See WP:WikiProject Conservatism/Templates for more stubs.


C-Class

C-Class articles are assessed using Individual Review, and the author is free to assess the article.


B-Class

B-Class articles are assessed using Individual Review, rating is typically left to an independent editor; requests for an independent assessment may be made here.


GA-Class

The good article nomination process is an independent review mechanism through which an article receives a "good article" quality rating. The process involves a detailed review of the article by an independent examiner, who determines whether the article meets the good article criteria. Full instructions for requesting a good article review are provided on the good article review page.


A-Class

The WikiProject Conservatism A-Class review process is the most thorough and demanding assessment of article quality done by the WikiProject Conservatism. An article that undergoes this process must be reviewed by at least two independent examiners, each of whom must agree that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria. Full instructions for requesting an A-Class review are provided on the A-Class review page.


FA-Class

The featured article candidacy and featured list candidacy processes are an independent, Wikipedia-wide quality assessment mechanism; these processes are the only way an article can receive a "featured" quality rating. The process involves a comprehensive review of the article by multiple independent examiners, all of whom must agree that the article meets the featured article or list criteria. Full instructions for submitting a featured article or list candidacy are provided on the corresponding candidacy page. Editors are advised to carefully review the submission instructions; failing to follow them correctly may cause the submission to be rejected.

Article tagging FAQEdit

Q: An article was erroneously tagged by a member of this project.
A: Do not remove the banner. Ask the member why they tagged it, or post a message at the project talk page (below). Note: the banner does not imply that the subject has a conservative or right-wing ideology, has no relevance to neutral POV, nor that WikiProject Conservatism owns the article.[1]
Q: I'm a member and the banner I added to an article talk page was removed.
A: From PROGGUIDE: You may not force them to remove the banner. No editor may prohibit a group of editors from showing their interest in an article. This warning {{WPRYT Uw-banner}} can be used to notify an editor of the guideline.
Q: Can non-members tag articles?
A: Yes, but if a member removes the banner do not replace it.[1]
Q: The quality or importance rating of an article is incorrect.
A: Anyone can change the rating. Make sure to consult the assessment scale here. Ratings are subjective, importance ratings in particular can be controversial. Disputes will be resolved by project members at the project talk page (below).[2][3]
Q: What is the scope of this WikiProject?
A: As stated on the main page of this project, we are dedicated to improving articles related to conservatism, not limited to any particular form or national variety of conservatism.

Assessment logEdit

October 14, 2019Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • David McKinley (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Steve McManus (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

October 13, 2019Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • Carl McIntire (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Rob Hurtt (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
  • William McKinley (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to FA-Class. (rev · t)
  • William McMahon (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)

October 12, 2019Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • Hwang Woo-yea (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
  • Nita Hutter (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

October 11, 2019Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • Damian Hinds (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Maxim Institute (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Paul Hinman (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Tom McClintock (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)

AssessedEdit

October 10, 2019Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • Joe Markley (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
  • Mel Martínez (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

AssessedEdit

October 9, 2019Edit

RenamedEdit

ReassessedEdit

  • Frank Luntz (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Jenny Beth Martin (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Juan Antonio Martínez (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
  • March for Life (Paris) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Philippe Malaud (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)

AssessedEdit

October 8, 2019Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • Doug Hoffman (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
  • People's Party of Canada (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Valarie Hodges (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

AssessedEdit

StatisticsEdit

Quality assessment: 89.8% complete
Importance assessment: 68.8% complete


Index · Statistics · Log

Former recognized contentEdit