Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology/Assessment


Welcome to the assessment department of the Sociology WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Sociology. 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 Sociology}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Sociology articles by quality, 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 Sociology WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
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

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Sociology}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Sociology |class= |importance= }}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

Quality scaleEdit

Importance scaleEdit

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Sociology.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.

Status Template Meaning of Status
Top {{Top-Class}} This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information.
High {{High-Class}} This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.
Mid {{Mid-Class}} This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Low {{Low-Class}} This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.
None None This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed.

Task force statisticsEdit

This section is intended to include statistics for the WikiProject Sociology Social movements task force.

Assessment requestsEdit

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. For assessment of articles above B class (GA, A, FL or FA) please submit them through the regular process.

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. Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study
  2. Mediatization (media)

Handled requestsEdit

Articles where an editor has responded to the request for reassessment can be moved here:

Handled requests
  1. Market (economics) Lbertolotti (talk) 16:45, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   mid importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  2. Hypocrisy - unattended and flagged for cleanup, I attended to it and cleaned it up today. - Thanks; LeoRomero (talk) 11:06, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   mid importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  3. Reproductive coercion
    Reviewed -   low importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  4. Privilege (social inequality) - Mid or High importance?
    Reviewed -   mid importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  5. I noticed that in Talk:Fucking Machines that this unfortunate article has a Good Article status from this WikiProject. This status needs to be reconsidered and likely removed. Rlsheehan (talk) 19:50, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
    Reviewed - Out of scope. Jamzze (talk) 11:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  6. Soka Gakkai - This article had been improved for the pass few month with many citation put into the article. Requesting a review for this article. Kelvintjy (talk) 04:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   low importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  7. Creative Cities Network = Requesting a review. Data presented in tables, City data completed for previous years, new city data added for 2014, descriptions added and all fully referenced.
    Reviewed - Out of scope. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  8. Combat Zone, Boston - This article needs to be looked at with a fresh pair of eyes. Please see Talk page. I've done a ton of work on it, but still...eh. --Rosekelleher (talk) 15:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   low importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  9. 4INFO - Improved. Please take a look. TY MarkMillerITPro (talk) 10:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
    Reviewed - Out of scope. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  10. Digital dependencies and global mental health Just wrote this article from the multidisciplinary perspective but this article is meant to be sociology and anthropology and its intersection with medicine. E.3 (talk) 05:38, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   mid importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  11. Nash's Pyramid - New to Wikipedia and would really appreciate any feedback and advice on how to improve this article!! Thanks Lvt01290 (talk) 11:49, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   low importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  12. Political bias is currently Class-C but lacks a rating on the importance scale. Also, a significant amount of content has been added since its last assessment. Please review. Thanks in advance, your help is greatly appreciated. 2804:14C:5BB5:8076:C93F:B074:E20:4395 (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
    Reviewed - Out of scope. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  13. Marxist humanism - I made substantive additions to this article over the last few months. I requested a review of the rating on the socialism portal, but I didn't get one. I'd like to request a review here instead. -- Hanshans23 (talk) 12:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   mid importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  14. People Power Please review this article about a grassroots protest method. Thanks in advance, your help is very much appreciated. Gadgetcat (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   mid importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
  15. Political sociology Improved. Would value outside review for a reassessent of its current grading. Jamzze (talk) 21:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
    Reviewed -   high importance. Jamzze (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Assessment logEdit

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.
Assessment log - click on "show" to the right to expand

July 1, 2022Edit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit

June 30, 2022Edit

RenamedEdit

ReassessedEdit

  • Dorit Geva (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

  • 2022 abortion protests (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Kyrkhlyar (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Nambassa (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
  • Peasant (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)

June 29, 2022Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

June 28, 2022Edit

ReassessedEdit

  • List of Yazidi tribes (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to NA-Class. (rev · t)
  • Role homogeneity (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

AssessedEdit

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

RemovedEdit

June 27, 2022Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

June 26, 2022Edit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

  • Gérard Dion (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)

RemovedEdit

June 25, 2022Edit

RenamedEdit

ReassessedEdit

AssessedEdit

RemovedEdit