Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorsport/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject on Motorsport, which focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Auto racing 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 programme.

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


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 {{WikiProject Motorsport}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Motorsport}} 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). However, all of our child project articles should have template on the article as they fall under our scope.
4. Who can assess articles?
Any member of the motorsport 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.
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?
People at Wikipedia:Peer Review can conduct a more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there, or ask for comments on the main project discussion page.
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.
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.


An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Motorsport}} project banner on its talk page (see the template page for more details on the exact syntax):

{{Motorsport class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values for the class parameter may be used:

The following values for the importance parameter may be used:

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

Quality scaleEdit

Article progress grading scheme
Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status after peer review, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. No further editing is necessary unless new published information has come to light; but further improvements to the text are often possible. Brabham (as of January 2007)
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. Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points. Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage. Eagle Mk1 (as of May 2007)
The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise good. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but having completed the Good article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class. Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, excessive information. Adequate for most purposes, but other encyclopedias could do a better job. Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time. Monaco Grand Prix (as of January 2007)
Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a completed article. Nonetheless, it has significant gaps or missing elements or references, needs substantial editing for English language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles. Useful to many, but not all, readers. A casual reader flipping through articles would feel that they generally understood the topic, but a serious student or researcher trying to use the material would have trouble doing so, or would risk error in derivative work. Considerable editing is still needed, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors. Articles for which cleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. Nigel Mansell (as of January 2007) has a lot of helpful material but contains too many lists, and needs more prose content & references.
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.
More detailed criteria
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 trivia. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.
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 address cleanup issues. Ron Dennis (as of July 2008)
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. 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
Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded. Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an article cleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage. Michael Andretti (as of January 2007)
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. Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. Fred Agabashian (as of January 2007)

Importance scaleEdit

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field. Formula One
(as of 2013)
High Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Lewis Hamilton
(as of 2013)
Mid Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. Bernd Schneider
(as of 2013)
Low Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. Dominik Farnbacher
(as of 2013)


Current statusEdit

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 feel free to list it below. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use Wikipedia:Peer review instead.

  1. 2008 Formula One season
  2. 1997 Australian Grand Prix
  3. Nico Hülkenberg - F3 Masters winner
  4. F1 In Schools - An internationally recognised competition involving CO2 Dragsters, supported by Formula 1. Nuclear froggy 20:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC) (Reviewed well before but I have made significant changes since.)
  5. 2008 European Grand Prix - I believe this should be reassessed to B-class. -- Guroadrunner (talk) 08:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
  6. Grave Digger- I'd like this article to be assessed. It has not been done before, and a rating would probably help its popularity and contributions.
  7. 2010-11 New Zealand V8 season
  8. JK Racing Asia Series - Formerly known as Formula BMW Pacific
  9. Top Doorslammer
  10. GP3 Series
  11. Los Angeles Motordrome
  12. 2012 British Touring Car Championship season
  13. British Formula Ford Championship
  14. BRL V6
  15. Raceway Venray
  16. 1936 French Grand Prix
  17. 1937 French Grand Prix - I created these pages fairly recently and they haven't been assessed.
  18. Extreme E — has been significantly extended and improved since the initial rating in May 2019.
  19. iRacing - Article was overhauled to include less cruft and maybe better sources. ~XyNqtc 15:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Add new requests at the bottom


The full log of assessment changes for the past seven days.

May 23, 2022Edit


May 22, 2022Edit




May 21, 2022Edit



May 20, 2022Edit



May 19, 2022Edit



May 18, 2022Edit



May 17, 2022Edit