Wikipedia:WikiProject Education/Assessment

Index · Statistics · Log

Education articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
Quality	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA		1	4	15		1	21
FL			1	4			5
GA	2	9	40	100		3	154
B	10	68	126	279		109	592
C	16	197	420	1,354		541	2,528
Start	17	208	517	3,605	4	2,081	6,432
Stub	1	29	108	2,075		1,310	3,523
List	1	8	23	145	7	112	296
Category				12	16,623		16,635
Disambig					53		53
File					918		918
Portal					4		4
Project				1	88		89
Template				1	599		600
NA	1	10	14	176	629		830
Other					602		602
Assessed	48	530	1,253	7,767	19,527	4,157	33,282
Unassessed		1		10		1,235	1,246
Total	48	531	1,253	7,777	19,527	5,392	34,528
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 65,495			Ω = 4.94

</noinclude>

This is the WikiProject Education assessment summary page. See WP:1.0 and WP:WVWP for more information. For Education articles, see Category:Education or Category:Education lists. For Education stubs, see Category:Education stubs.

Instructions edit

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Education}} banner on its talk page.

{{WikiProject Education|class=|importance=}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class education articles)
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class education articles)
GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class education articles)
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class education articles)
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class education articles)
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class education articles)
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class education articles)
NA (for pages, such as redirects or user pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class education articles)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed education articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance education articles)
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance education articles)
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance education articles)
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance education articles)

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Grading scheme edit

Quality scale edit

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. It is: well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard; comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; 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; neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; 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 compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of: a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and 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. 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. 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: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations. (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly. (c) Accessibility. It uses proper formating to be accessible to all readers. Bulleted and unbulleted lists and tables are structured correctly. Visual media, if included, utilize alternative (alt) text. 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: Well-written: the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; 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); it contains no original research; and it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and 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 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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 encyclopaedia
High	Subject contributes a depth of knowledge
Mid	Subject fills in more minor details
Low	Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial

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.

The Eaton House Group of Schools: Substantial improvement and a full overhaul, all completely sourced. Many famous alumni - and therefore very notable IMO. One Of Seven Billion (talk) 05:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Flat Stanley Project: This article is currently unrated. I have since cleaned-up the article and provided references. Thanks. --Marchije•^speak/_peek 04:46, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adolf Fredrik's Music School Major update --Klättermusen (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mental health in aviation This article has been extensively revised. Please review my article. Mbenderb1 (talk) 20:56, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Elec junto Grade Skipping is still lacking an importance rating and I am not familiar enough with this project to give it one. Elec junto (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:Ryanx7 A few of us have been editing the page on Public Sphere Pedagogy and would appreciate an independent assessment by a project member.Ryanx7 (talk) 18:19, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:Djohnson82 Requesting assessment of Culturally Relevant Teaching. Request made 13 April 2012.
Brunswick (Brittonkill) Central School District: This page is only about a month old but is pretty extensive and could use a rating from a member of this wikiproject. Thanks! Wadester16 (talk) 03:11, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Otto Frederick Hunziker. The article has since been listed as a good article under the good article criteria. I believe that, for WikiProject Education, the article was automatically upgraded from a quality rating of B-Class to GA. I would be interested in any further assessment to A Class or comments regarding possible changes to further progress. Also, could someone reassess the importance rating?--Rpclod (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stargate School This article had just gotten a major overhaul and could use a rating. I am still working on references and the like but this article is a far cry from what it used to be, and an assessment could really be helpful in working on this article. This article has never gotten an assessment, and I will most likely submit further requests after the initial assessment in an attempt to boost the rating. Binglebongle2000 (talk) 15:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose College: This page was created few weeks back and expanding its content. Need rating and importance for this article from this wikiproject.Shivaji Mitra (talk) 08:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
high-stakes testing: While there is some debate over the exact form the article should take, I think it could do with an assessment. After all, it's a 2 year old article. Irbisgreif (talk) 15:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Education in Indore: This is list of Educational institutions in Indore(India). Most of the listed institutans have either Internal or External links/References added. Actively being monitored and Updated.
School for Creative and Performing Arts : This article has been extensively revised and should be rerated. It's importance has also not been assessed yetVaughanchris (talk) 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Education in Ancient Greece: This page was added on to significantly and could use a reevaluation from a wikiproject member. Thank you. Wordwizard1 (talk) 21:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
University of Texas at Dallas: Major update. Stan9999 (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Education in the Netherlands: has not been rated previously --Eddyspeeder (talk) 14:14, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
University Institute of Engineering and Technology, Panjab University: has not been rated by WikiProject_Education SARVPRIYE SONI(Wanna Talk?) 00:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Zimbabwe School Examinations Council: yet to be rated by WikiProject Education. Kuda188 (talk) 00:42, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Peace Revolution is a new article about an online youth development platform. It is still unassessed now.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 11:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
General Certificate of Secondary Education - I've massively restructured this article and removed redundancy and errors. I'm not sure if the category will change, but a reassessment would be welcome. ATMarsden ^Talk 12:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I Promise School is a newly created article that is still unassessed. throast 07:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Macabre constant was never assessed since its creation. --Signimu (talk) 18:49, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Political bias is currently Class-C but lacks a rating on the importance scale. Also, a significant amount of content has been added since its last assessment. Please review. Thanks in advance, your help is greatly appreciated. 2804:14C:5BB5:8076:C93F:B074:E20:4395 (talk) 10:18, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juren has been improved upon. Could this page please be assessed? Some major contributes have been made very recently. Thank you! Qwj5377 (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bachelor of Economics: Please review the article's rating following recent expansion. Thanks. Fintor (talk) 08:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment log (updated by bot) edit

This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

This page was once used by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is preserved because of the information in its edit history. This page should not be edited or deleted. Wikiproject article lists can be generated using the WP 1.0 web tool.