Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland/Assessment

Project page Talk
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland
Shortcut
Ireland articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 6 3 25 28 62
FL 2 4 6
GA 1 10 60 162 233
B 29 189 417 715 1,350
C 28 197 845 3,845 4,915
Start 223 2,334 26,798 2 29,357
Stub 6 448 26,571 27,025
List 32 319 2,951 3,302
Category 22,942 22,942
Disambig 211 211
File 161 161
Portal 4 4
Project 1 27 28
Template 2,935 2,935
NA 320 1,308 1,628
Other 1 85 86
Assessed 64 661 4,450 61,395 27,673 2 94,245
Unassessed 16 16
Total 64 661 4,450 61,395 27,673 18 94,261
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 333,244 Ω = 5.29

Welcome to the assessment department of the Ireland WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to Ireland. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Ireland}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Ireland articles by quality and Category:Ireland articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questionsEdit

How can I get my article rated?
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of the Ireland WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
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.
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.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are, 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!
Where do I find a list of new Irish related articles?
A new Ireland Search Results list is produced almost daily and older results (since September 2007) are archived here.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

InstructionsEdit

Quality assessmentsEdit

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

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

After assessing an article's quality, any comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

Quality scaleEdit

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
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.

  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.
 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. 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:
  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.
 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:
  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. all inline citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counterintuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;
    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 (but not equaling) 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. 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
  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 it does not need to be "brilliant". 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.
 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. Human
(as of April 2019)
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. Ring-tailed cardinalfish
(as of June 2018)
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. Crescent Falls
(as of June 2018)
List 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 Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 1947
(as of June 2018)

Importance assessmentEdit

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

{{WikiProject Ireland| ... | importance=??? | ...}}
Top
High
Mid
Low
???

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

Importance scaleEdit

The assessment team have developed some criteria specific to Irish articles as guidelines for deciding the importance of articles being assessed. Different criteria tables have been created for different topic groups as shown below.

Article importance grading scheme guidelines
Label Criteria General Irish biographies' Historic figures, presidents, politicians Entertainers Sports people
Top High probability that non-Historians would look this up. Limited to the top 5–10 biographies. Must have had a large impact outside of their main discipline, across several generations, and in the majority of the world. For instance, Joyce, affected people in many other countries besides Ireland and for several generations. Members should not give this rating to any biography without first getting Project approval from the other members. James Joyce Eamon de Valera U2 Barry McGuigan
High Must have had a large impact in their main discipline, across a couple of generations. Had some impact outside their country of origin. Robert Boyle Garrett Fitzgerald Rory Gallagher Roy Keane
Mid Important in their discipline. Bram Stoker Pat Rabbitte Neil Jordan Stephen Roche
Low Subject is notable in their main discipline. Henry Kelly Edward Guinness Ciaran Bourke Peter Lawrie
Article importance grading scheme guidelines
Label Criteria Cities, towns and villages Mountains, Lakes and Rivers Roads Public Transport
Top High probability that general readers outside Ireland would look this up. Well known outside the country and important in the life and history of Ireland. Members should not give this rating to any article without first getting Project approval from the other members. Dublin River Shannon The M50 Ryanair
High Regarded as very important within the country, perhaps not well known abroad.

Counties or County Towns.

Sligo Lough Ree The N7 road Dublin Bus
Mid Local or regional importance in Ireland. Towns with over 10,000 people which are not officially Cities or County Towns. Lower importance national roads. Bray River Suck The N62 Luas
Low Towns and villages of importance within a county or even just a locality. Geographical features that would be well known to people with an interest in the topic only. Regional and local roads. Dungarvan Sugarloaf (West Wicklow) The R747 Abbeyshrule

Requesting an assessmentEdit

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. Archived requests

  • Declan Costello I made a major expansion to the article in January 2022, and it seems like the last assessment was in 2010. I have also placed the article up for Good Article nomination. However, another user has encouraged me to have the article re-assessed and see if it reaches B Category before the GA assessment occurs. CeltBrowne (talk) 17:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Uprated from Start to C. Close to B but would need a little more substance on the midlife aspect - there's a high weighting on the family / early life, and the titles / succession, but a shortfall beyond brief military career data. For the material that is present, referencing is decent, and the picture is appropriate. SeoR (talk) 14:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the meantime, this was correctly uprated to B. It is not sufficiently well-referenced to reach GA (we don't do A in this project, but there is a very recent GA Review). SeoR (talk) 14:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Beekeeping in Ireland Over the past couple of years there has been many improvements and sources added to this wiki page and I feel that a rating of B-Class for Quality Scale for this WikiProject Ireland page would bee more appropriate. -- Bibby Bibby (talk) 15:21, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think there is material for B, but I am not convinced, having read over this, and looked at some sources, that the current article meets the spirit of the level, due to unbalanced coverage and essay-like sections. I will come back to this, as the article (like one or two other heavily cross-edited pages with strong links to one or more membership associations). SeoR (talk) 23:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Requesting the following:
A pleasure to read, a clear B, and with a bit of work, could be made GA-ready. SeoR (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A tricky topic, and an article with a messy history and multiple accusations of PoV, etc. - but I think a clear B anyway. I will revisit with copyedit pen, with due caution, in a while. SeoR (talk) 23:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Quite a bit of better so have upped the rating to C in line with the current Military project's rating. All project rating should be the same. ww2censor (talk) 11:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • First Dáil - expanded in Jan 2019, last assessed in 2014.
Small improvements but certainly a C-class now. ww2censor (talk) 11:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Black and Tans - expanded in Jan 2020, last assessed by WP:IE in 2014 and by WP:MIL in 2013.
A fine balance between C and B, but in the end, I think it meets the requirements for B. I'd like to see parts fleshed out a bit, including more detail on operations, command structure and culture, but these are not mandatory for B. SeoR (talk) 23:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A solid C, no more but should not be hard to expand and reference to B. SeoR (talk) 23:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moving to B after review, a really solid piece of work now (a great pity not revisited in near-12 years). While more supporting material, such as a map, would be nice, the criteria are quite clear that this is not a barrier. Informative over a decent range of sub-topics, and with moderate work could try for GA. SeoR (talk) 23:39, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will look again when fresh tomorrow but for now, my instinct, honed by many thousands of reviews, says C is correct, and a bit more depth and context would be ideal for B. But it's a close thing. Ww2censor, could you opine too? SeoR (talk) 23:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A very robust C, and if upscaled just a bit, B is in reach. SeoR (talk) 08:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nicely taken further, to B, a good review of a big topic. With a bit more extraction from the vast range of scholarly and other sources, this one can be a strong GA-or-better candidate. SeoR (talk) 08:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Navan Fort - expanded in Oct 2016, last assessed in 2010.
~Asarlaí 23:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, will take these on... SeoR (talk) 11:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for taking the time to re-assess these, SeoR, it's much appreciated. ~Asarlaí 15:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Bar of Ireland - Last assessed in 2009. Significantly expanded and redrafted throughout the years since.
~89.101.133.50 (talk) 15:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Changed the rating to a C, it may be a B but I'd need to confer on that! Sarah777 (talk) 02:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


To-do / plansEdit

Now that all articles identified as relevant have been assessed, suggestions for the next works are welcome. I suggest, for example:

  • Resolve NA articles with ratings, they should either be stripped out of the project or set to NA / NA status (this group primarily consists of redirects).
  • Revisit the question of tabulating Redirect items distinctly, as raised on the Talk page before.
  • Review the selection in the Top prio group. I imagine that around 1% of the substantive article base is a good level, and up to 2% would be OK. Right now I see only 1-2 I would not be sure about having in this level, but there may be some more in High which should be considered. We could then also review High. Below that I would not go, leaving Mid and Low to be assigned or reassessed "on the go". SeoR (talk) 10:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assessment logEdit

Ireland articles:
Index · Statistics · Log
The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

May 26, 2023Edit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

May 25, 2023Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

May 24, 2023Edit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ireland/Assessment&oldid=1149246507"