Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Florida! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Florida related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the WP:1.0 program,

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPFlorida}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Florida articles by quality.


See also the general assessment FAQ.
1. What is the purpose of the article ratings?
The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
Just add {{WPFlorida}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WPFlorida}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. What should I do?
Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
4. Who can assess articles?
Any member of the Florida WikiProject 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.
5. How do I rate an article?
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 that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
6. Can I request that someone else rate an article?
Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
7. Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments?
Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. 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. Where can I get more comments about an article?
The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
9. What if I don't agree with a rating?
You can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it. Alternately, you can 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 that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
10. 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!
11. What if I have a question not listed here?
If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.

Assessment instructionsEdit

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


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 Florida articles)   FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Florida articles)   A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Florida articles)   GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Florida articles)   B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Florida articles)   C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Florida articles)   Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Florida articles)   Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Florida articles)   FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Florida 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 Florida articles)   Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Florida articles)   Disambig 
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Florida articles)   Draft 
FM (for featured media only; adds pages to Category:FM-Class Florida articles)   FM 
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Florida articles)   File 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Florida articles)   Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Florida articles)   Project 
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Florida articles)   Redirect 
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Florida articles)   Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Florida articles)   NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Florida articles)   ??? 

Quality scaleEdit

Label Criteria Formal process Example
Reserved for articles that meet the featured article criteria and have received featured article status after community review. Featured article candidates 1928 Okeechobee Hurricane
Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. May be assigned by any reviewer, but, generally, articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B', unless they are already rated as 'GA' by Wikipedia:Good articles/Candidates. Coral Springs, Florida
Reserved for articles that meet the good article criteria and have received good article status. Good article nominations Nikki Fried
The article meets the following five criteria:
  1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited.
  2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.
  3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
  4. It is free from major grammatical errors.
  5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.
May be assigned by any reviewer

A checklist is available through{{WPFlorida}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details); the checklist generates Category:B-Class Florida articles needing review (for current B-Class articles that may not meet all the criteria) and Category:Potential B-Class Florida articles (for below-B-Class articles that meet all five)

Florida (as of May 2007 (confirmed))
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.

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. Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues. Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.

May be assigned by any reviewer Kennedy Space Center
(as of December 2008)
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element; it has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:
  • A particularly 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
May be assigned by any reviewer Sebring, Florida
The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. May be assigned by any reviewer Miami Gardens, Florida

Requests for assessmentEdit

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please make a new comment section on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Florida. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use Wikipedia:Peer review instead.

Assessment LogEdit

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.

January 18, 2022Edit


  • Verdura Plantation (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)


  • Al Jacquet (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)

January 17, 2022Edit



January 16, 2022Edit



January 15, 2022Edit



January 14, 2022Edit


  • Benjamin Crump (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

January 13, 2022Edit



  • DJ Stewart (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)


January 12, 2022Edit