Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee/Assessment/Archive 1

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee‎ | Assessment


This is an archive of Wikiproject Tennessee assessment requests. Please add archive items to the appropriate section below. Newest items at the bottom of the section.

Archive: Request an assessment


  • Carol Chumney i gave it the lowest ratings to start, just so there would be ratings there but i want you to take a look at itRankun 07:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
At the moment I would not agree to change the ratings of the article. The first two paragraphs (Biography and Acclaimations) have been copied from the City of Memphis website (http://www.cityofmemphis.org/framework.aspx?page=701). The article has been tagged for possible copyright violation. It might be necessary to re-write sections of the article. doxTxob \ talk 19:46, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


Would someone mind to re-assess the above three articles? I have researched and written most of the content myself. The articles are rated very low as I did the first temporary rating myself when I went through the hundreds of Tennessee related articles and rated them for the Wikipedia Project Tennessee. All the three articles fulfil the formal criteria of the higher class, in my opinion. There are almost no red links, all the facts are sourced, the articles are structured with sub-headers and images are present to illustrate the topics. They are all small topics, so there is not much chance for expansion.
I would also like to ask expert advice on what to improve on the Nutbush, Tennessee article to bring it to Good Article(GA)-class. Every suggestion is welcome.
Thank you! doxTxob \ talk 20:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • A cursory glance at the articles shows (to me, at least) that these articles are indeed B-Class. The only thing I can see with a quick look is the need for some grammatical adjustments, mostly on Nutbush, Tennessee. The sources appear in order, though. With some fact-checking and maybe a little more literal fluffing (surely there's something we can add to the town's economic section - cotton production figures, the name of the cotton plant, etc.?), I think Nutbush, Tennessee can stand the GA test. I'll be happy to help is required - the wife and I specialize in sentence structuring (though it may not seem like it sometimes!). We'll look over it a little further tonight. Sidatio 21:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your opinion. I would be happy for someone to look over the grammar. Actually German is my first language, Enlish only second, although I do not think I am too bad at it, some native speaker polishing would be greatly appreciated.
For the rating for the above three articles I would appreciate you changing the rating if there is no opposition. I hate to do it myself, it does not look right. And any member of the Wiki Project Tennessee can change the ratings in articles that are part of the project. Thank you for that!
I copy part of this discussion on the talk page of theNutbush, Tennessee article, so we might continue the discussion about Nutbush on the article's talk page, where it is close to the article. doxTxob \ talk 21:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
You're not bad at it at all! The grammar fixes in question are very, very minor - we just wanted to clear them up so some nitpicky reviewer didn't look through the article and turn it down based solely on those minor issues. I'll change the ratings tonight when I get home from work, and we'll look through the Nutbush article to see how best to "fluff" it. ;-) Sidatio 21:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Great! Let's continue the discussion on the Nutbush talk page. And thanks again for your help. doxTxob \ talk 00:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)


  • Tennessee Air National Guard Any objections to bumping this article up from Start to B-Class? I have included concise histories of all units in the TNANG as well as synopses of the aircraft used and facilities. Anyone have any suggestions for improvement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nf utvol (talk • contribs)
Looks okay to me. The info for the 572nd Band is repeated under the "Geographically Separated" category. I'd pull that. Can we get more info on that unit, as well? Competitions, notable events, anything we can use to bolster it? Have any of the TANG units been deployed in overseas conflicts? It should still be a B-Class, but it'd be nice to see that kinda info. Sidatio 19:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Agree with B-class. Low end but still B-class in my opinion. Article has useful images, depicing planes that are in use in the units mentioned. The article is structured with subheaders. The three wings are treated in subsections and references are present, this encourages other authors to continue the way it was started and use reference, too. I like that very much.
Suggestion 1: Try to get rid of red links further down in the article. As you seem to be knowledgable about the subject matter it might be worth to start new articles on the topics that miss a corresponding article. For the start the new article might need only a few sentences, structure with subheaders and references.
Suggestion 2: When I read the article I was missing one thing. In the introduction a reader who is not very familiar with the topic (like me, for example) might ask what the whole purpose of the TN Air National Guard (or Air National Guards in general) is. Not too specific, as the purposes of the wings is described, just in two sentences the general purpose of the Air National Guard.
Suggestion 3: Explain abbreviations. I have corrected that for all but the abbreviation BRAC, I don't know what it means, than one still needs "treatment". For readers not familiar with the topic the abbreviations used might be unknown. Introductions can be very useful if explained and introduced to the reader in every article. The best way to introduce an abbreviation to the reader is when the term appears in the article for the first time. You use the fully spelled words followed by the abbreviation in brackets. From then on the abbreviation can be used in the text without the fully spelled words. Like this example: "The Tennessee Valley Authoity (TVA) was founded in 19xx. The purpose of the TVA is ... and so on ...". Always be aware that other readers might not have the knowledge you have about the topic. So every abbreviation needs an explanation.
Remark: The 572nd Band appears twice in the article, once under its own subheader and once in the section with the geographically seperated units. Both sentences are the same, this does not make immediate sense to me. You might want to fix that. This was mentioned before, saw that too late. doxTxob \ talk 19:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Changed the rating from start to B-class, as per above. doxTxob \ talk 19:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the input! I made a few of the corrections listed. I'll work on compiling a list of deployments for the various units and get something up about that here in the next couple of days. Also, could someone recommend an importance rating for this article?Nf utvol 19:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


  • Gatlinburg — expanded the history and geography sections and added hard-copy citations (should be at least B class)
  • Cades Cove — expanded the geology and history sections and included a section with brief descriptions of its historical structures; included hard references (should be at least B class)
I agree both articles should be B-Class. Both articles have been worked on extensively in the last few weeks and relevant new information has been added. Formally both articles fulfill the criteria for B-Class articles, namely having the majority of formal elements that make a complete article. In both articles images illutrate the topic, sub-headings are present that fully treat elements of the topic, especially in the history sections of both articles. References are used and links help explain the topic. Both articles are complete enough for a reader to understand the topic.
This project is quite new and I am not sure of the correct process. I suggest that if there are no objections in the next few days the quality rating can be changed to B-class. doxTxob \ talk 19:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Changed both articles from Start-class to B-class as per above. doxTxob \ talk 18:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Archive: Dispute an assessment

  • Cades Cove — CC very well-known in East Tennessee (I'm not sure about Middle and West); draws over two million visitors per year, which is more than most state parks; one of the most important (if not the most important) areas dedicated to the preservation and understanding of pioneer life in Appalachia. I would rate it mid-level. Bms4880 17:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
You are right, according to the definitions of the importance for the project the article is certainly mid-level. Cades Cove is reasonably notable within TN. I have changed it. doxTxob \ talk 18:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Knox County, Tennessee - This article is in terrible shape - we have very little history (though I bolstered it some with a section on the Civil War), the Government section is mostly about Black Wednesday, and we lack basic geographic features like bodies of water, high and low points in the county, etc. This is a Start-class article, not a B-class. Maybe a re-rate will draw more attention to it, so we can get it up to where it needs to be. Sidatio 15:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
You made some great additions to the article recently. As for the rating, I see the article as somewhat too developed to be Start-class. The quality scale does not require the article to be perfect to be B-class, there are some formal requirements to fulfil, though, which in the case of this article are fulfilled (in my opinion). Multiple links are present to illustrate the topic, subheadings struclture the article and the paragraphs about the Civil War and law and government treat that topic to some extend. Missing elements or gaps, the need for editing or even policy issues do not nessessarily keep an article from being assessed as B-class.
There is certainly much work needed to bring this article into a shape to be an undisputed B-class article. I am glad to see that you have started to take care of it and add some much needed improvements on the contents, so the artcile is getting better every day.
I saw you live in Knox County, maybe you can add a useful image or two to the article. A useful image is one of the formal criteria a B-class article needs to fulfil, so an image would bring the article closer to the undisputed B-class quality.doxTxob \ talk 15:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I suppose it is somewhere in between. As far as the pictures go, that's certainly easy enough - but what pictures to take? There's several shots that would be good for Knoxville, but to find one that defines Knox County on the whole would take a little thought. Maybe a shot from House Mountain, or a picture of the French Broad. I'll snap a few this weekend, but my main focus at this juncture is to get the written information up to par - especially the Government section. Thanks for the input! Sidatio 15:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Archive: Project review

Four of the Tennessee related articles tagged with the project banner are top and high quality articles that need priority assessment of their importance for the TN project. All of them are taken care of by other projects already. Still, they should get an importance rating for the Tennessee project.

Talk:Battle_of_Shiloh, FA (Featured article) class article. Not yet rated for importance for the TN project.
Talk:Daniel_Boone, FA (Featured article) class article. Not yet rated for importance for the TN project.
Talk:James_K._Polk, FA (Featured article) class article. Not yet rated for importance for the TN project.
Talk:John_Seigenthaler,_Sr., GA (Good article) class article. Not yet rated for importance for the TN project.
doxTxob 18:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive: Articles for deletion

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tennessee/Assessment/Archive_1&oldid=390498484"