| Skepticism articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
 FA
|
2 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 17 | ||
| FL
|
1 | 1 | |||||
 GA
|
6 | 12 | 20 | 48 | 86 | ||
| B | 18 | 67 | 151 | 230 | 466 | ||
| C | 15 | 95 | 287 | 640 | 1,037 | ||
| Start | 5 | 70 | 278 | 1,227 | 1 | 1,581 | |
| Stub | 71 | 71 | |||||
| List | 2 | 15 | 28 | 60 | 105 | ||
| Category | 1 | 3 | 8 | 1,310 | 1,322 | ||
| Disambig | 7 | 7 | |||||
| File | 13 | 13 | |||||
| Project | 19 | 19 | |||||
| Template | 3 | 3 | 35 | 41 | |||
| NA | 132 | 132 | |||||
| Other | 1 | 6 | 7 | ||||
| Assessed | 49 | 265 | 770 | 2,298 | 1,522 | 1 | 4,905 |
| Unassessed | 2 | 2 | |||||
| Total | 49 | 265 | 770 | 2,298 | 1,522 | 3 | 4,907 |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 14,054 | Ω = 4.31 | |||||
Welcome to the assessment department of the Skepticism WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Skepticism 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 Skepticism}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Skepticism articles by quality and Category:Skepticism 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 Skepticism 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 Skepticism}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=???}}
After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.
Quality scaleEdit
| 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.
|
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. | Charles Darwin (as of September 2015) |
| FL |
The article has attained featured list status. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
|
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 awards and nominations received by Penn & Teller: Bullshit! (as of September 2015) |
 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 has attained good article status, having been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria
The article meets the good article criteria:
A good article is:
|
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. | Merseyside Skeptics Society (as of September 2015) |
| B | The article is mostly complete and without major problems but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria
The article meets the six B-Class criteria:
|
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. | Susan Gerbic (as of September 2015) |
| C | The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains much 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; 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. It is most likely that C-Class articles have a reasonable encyclopedic style.
|
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. | Repressed memory (as of September 2015) |
| 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 usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style compliance non-existent. The article should satisfy fundamental content policies, such as Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Frequently, the referencing is inadequate, although enough sources are usually provided to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.
|
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. | Holistic veterinary medicine (as of September 2015) |
| Stub | A very basic description of the topic. Can be well-written, but may also have significant content issues. More detailed criteria
The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short; however, if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category. Although Stub-class articles are the lowest class of the normal classes, they are adequate enough to be an accepted article, though they do have risks of being dropped from being an article altogether.
|
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. | Occult science (as of September 2015) |
| 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 skeptical podcasts (as of September 2015) |
| Disambig | Any disambiguation page falls under this class. | The page serves to distinguish multiple articles that share the same (or similar) title. | Additions should be made as new articles of that name are created. Pay close attention to the proper naming of such pages, as they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title. | Extraterrestial (as of September 2015) |
| File | Any page in the file namespace falls under this class. | The page contains an image, a sound clip or other media-related content. | Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. | File:JREFGerbicTAMaward.jpg (as of September 2015) |
Importance assessmentEdit
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Skepticism}} project banner on its talk page:
- {{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=???}}
The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):
| Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Skepticism articles) | Top | |
| High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Skepticism articles) | High | |
| Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Skepticism articles) | Mid | |
| Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Skepticism articles) | Low | |
| NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Skepticism articles) | NA | |
| ??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Skepticism articles) | ??? |
Importance scaleEdit
| Importance | Criteria | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Top | Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field. | Scientific skepticism |
| High | Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science |
| Mid | Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | Steven Novella |
| 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. | Bates method |
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.
Conspiracy TheoryStill C class. There's a quote repeated a few times, and the Examples section should have at least some of the more famous. Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Rod (cryptozoology)It's a B class. Not sure it's any higher, but still, nice article. Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Gerovital (possibly also categorizable under alternative medicine?)It's written well enough, but needs too many citations, C class. Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science - still under development and discussion, but an assessment would be helpfulThat was a read, but B class it is. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Creation and evolution in public education UnratedIt's been rated a B since. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Amazing Meeting has recently been significantly rewrittenIt's at a B level now, and I'd say even higher. @Sgerbic: you may wish to use peer-review to ask for a higher level. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)NarcononAssessed for us. Jerod Lycett (talk) 08:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Diploma millIt's assessed correctly as B class. Jerod Lycett (talk) 08:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Anneliese Michel - recently brought within this projects fold, has some improvement but not assessed so far.Assessed it as B, not sure it's higher though. Jerod Lycett (talk) 08:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Jere H. Lipps
Checked: After the update I have assessed as B. The article suffers from a lack of photos. Lipps has some important research that could be expanded in a future update. Kyle(talk) 02:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC) 02:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)- Tyler Henry reality show "medium" in USA Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 08:45, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
- Rommel myth -- new article. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:39, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- James Oberg -- expanded, please assess. Akumiszcza (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
- List of superstitions - Converted from redirect to stub, assessed as Mid importance taking a clue from Superstition, which has a Top rating. Paradoctor (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
- Fad diet - entire revision using WP:MEDRS sources for health claims (guidelines, reviews), and reviews and encyclopedias for the history section + cleaning/deleting primary sources + illustrations. Was rated a start class a long time ago, should be reassessed. --Signimu (talk) 19:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Roberto Burioni Expanded from a stub. Please assess. JohnnyBflat (talk) 15:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Assessment logEdit
| Skepticism 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.
 | This is a log of operations by a bot. The contents of this page are unlikely to need human editing. In particular, links should not be disambiguated as this is a historical record. |
June 29, 2022Edit
ReassessedEdit
- Círculo Escéptico (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- D. J. Grothe (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from B-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- Dakshina Kannada Rationalist Association (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- SKEPP (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- The Amityville Horror (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
AssessedEdit
- Atheist Alliance International (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Café Scientifique (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Committee for the Scientific Examination of Religion (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Committee on the Public Understanding of Science (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Dorkbot (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Humanist Association of Ghana (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Humanists Sweden (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Humanists UK (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Hungarian Skeptic Society (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- International Academy of Humanism (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Kerala Yukthivadi Sangham (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Lists of atheists (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as List-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Maximum Fun (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Nerd Nite (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- New Mexicans for Science and Reason (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Norwegian Humanist Association (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Philo (journal) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Richard Dawkins Award (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as FA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Robert G. Ingersoll (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- SETI Institute (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Skepticon (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Tarksheel Society (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
June 28, 2022Edit
AssessedEdit
- 1947 flying disc craze (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Hal Huggins (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
June 26, 2022Edit
RenamedEdit
- LGM-1 renamed to PSR B1919+21.
ReassessedEdit
- Colin Evans (medium) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Kenneth Arnold UFO sighting (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from High-Class to Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Worlds in Collision (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to B-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Low-Class to Mid-Class. (rev · t)
RemovedEdit
- David Colquhoun (talk) removed.
- PSR B1919+21 (talk) removed.
June 25, 2022Edit
ReassessedEdit
- Blood stasis (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- COMCEPT (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Cash–Landrum incident (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Center for Countering Digital Hate (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Char Margolis (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Charles M. Fair (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Church of Scientology International (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Climate Hustle (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Clinica 0-19 (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Commission on Pseudoscience (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Conspiracy theories in United States politics (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Coso artifact (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Courtier's reply (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Covert hypnosis (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Critical understanding (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Fred J. Hart (businessman) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Greek cancer cure (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Gulf Breeze UFO incident (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Heim theory (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Honeygar (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- James Harvey Young (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Koestler Parapsychology Unit (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Liverpool Homeopathic Hospital (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Lives of the Necromancers (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Lorne Trottier (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Lynne McTaggart (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Michael W. Friedlander (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Nazis: The Occult Conspiracy (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Niche insurance (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Onychomancy (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Per Landgren (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Ruth B. Drown (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Scarab (artifact) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Spirit (vital essence) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Spirit photography (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Spiritism in Costa Rica (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Spygate (conspiracy theory) (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- The Great Betrayal: Fraud in Science (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Low-Class to NA-Class. (rev · t)
- The Humanist (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- The Occult History of the Third Reich (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- The Silbón (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Ulric Williams (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Weleda (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- What's The Harm? (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Mid-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Wonder en is gheen Wonder (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Young Australian Skeptics (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
AssessedEdit
- Category:Aphrodisiac foods (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Edinburgh Secular Society (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Kari Jaquesson (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Mayra Flores (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
RemovedEdit
- Merseyside Skeptics Society/Archive 1 (talk) removed.
June 24, 2022Edit
ReassessedEdit
- Leah Remini: Scientology and the Aftermath (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Mid-Class. (rev · t)
- Letters from the Earth (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Life review (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Livity (spiritual concept) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Long Island Medium (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Loveland frog (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Stage hypnosis (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Stargate Project (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Sumerian creation myth (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Superior: The Return of Race Science (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
AssessedEdit
- Critical understanding (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Supernatural beings identified with Christian saints (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
June 23, 2022Edit
ReassessedEdit
- Haunted house (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- History of alien abduction claims (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Hoia Forest (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Hollow Earth (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Holy Fire (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Hunza diet (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Pesticides in the United States (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Polarity therapy (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Polybius (urban legend) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Problem of Hell (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Psychic Friends Network (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Psychic archaeology (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Psychometry (paranormal) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- The Late Great Planet Earth (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)