Open main menu

Welcome to the assessment department of the Religious texts WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's religious text-related articles. 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 Religious texts}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Religious texts articles by quality and Category:Religious texts articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Contents

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 Religious texts 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!

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 Religious texts}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Religious texts|class=???}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Quality scale for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Religious texts articles)   FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Religious texts articles)   A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Religious texts articles)   GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Religious texts articles)   B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Religious texts articles)   C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Religious texts articles)   Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Religious texts articles)   Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Religious texts articles)   FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Religious texts articles)   List 

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Religious texts articles)   Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Religious texts articles)   Disambig 
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Religious texts articles)   Draft 
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Religious texts articles)   File 
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Religious texts articles)   Redirect 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Religious texts articles)   Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Religious texts articles)   Project 
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Religious texts articles)   Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Religious texts articles)   NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Religious texts articles)   ??? 

After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added either to the article's talk page or to the /Comments subpage which will appear as a link next to the assessment. Adding comments will add the article to Category:Religious texts articles with comments. Comments that are added to the /Comments subpages will be transcluded onto the automatically generated work list pages in the Comments column.

Quality scaleEdit

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Importance assessmentEdit

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

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

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

Importance scaleEdit

Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Top The article is one of the core topics about religious texts. Generally, this is limited to those articles that are included as sections of the main Religious text article. A reader who is not involved in the religious texts field will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily. Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages.
High The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding religious texts.
Mid The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in the history of religious texts. Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject. Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand religious texts. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text. Most people involved in the history of religious texts will be rated in this level.
Low The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of religious texts. Few readers outside the atheism field or that are not students of religious texts may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article. Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of religious texts, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed. Topics included at this level include most practices and infrastructure of religious texts.

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.

  1. Requesting review for the article Amoris laetitia. The article does not yet have a rating from this project. PluniaZ (talk) 19:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Assessment logEdit

Religious texts 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.

October 8, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 7, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 6, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 5, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 4, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 3, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 2, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

October 1, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 30, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 29, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 28, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 27, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 26, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 25, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

September 24, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 23, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 22, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 21, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 20, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 19, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 18, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 17, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 16, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 15, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 14, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 13, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 12, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 11, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 10, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

September 9, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 8, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 7, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

September 6, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 5, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

September 4, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 3, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 2, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

September 1, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 31, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 30, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 29, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 28, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 27, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

RemovedEdit

August 26, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 25, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 24, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 23, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

August 22, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

August 21, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 20, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 19, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

August 18, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

August 17, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

August 16, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 15, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

  • Ubi periculum (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

August 14, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 13, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 12, 2018Edit

RenamedEdit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

  • Simla Hadasha (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

August 11, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 10, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 9, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 8, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 7, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 6, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 5, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

August 4, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

August 3, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

August 2, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

RemovedEdit

  • Sefer Zadok (talk) removed. Quality rating was Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating was Unknown-Class (rev · t).

August 1, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

July 31, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

July 30, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

July 29, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

July 28, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

July 27, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

July 26, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

July 25, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

July 24, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

July 23, 2018Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit