These are the two grading schemes used in the Volleyball wikiproject, with the grading template.
Statistics edit
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grading template edit
The template used for grading the quality / progress and the relative importance / necesssity of articles for the wikiproject is {{WikiProject Volleyball}}. The specific syntax for use of this template can be found on its template page.
Grading for quality edit
The "Quality", or progress, scheme is used to ascertain what work is needed to improve the article. The ultimate goal of using this grade is to bring as many articles to "FC", or "Featured Content" status as possible.
| Label | General Criteria
Volleyball-Specific Criteria |
Reader's experience | Editor's experience | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 FA{{FA-Class}} |
Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, 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. | Supernova (as of February 2007)
Timpani |
 A{{A-Class}} |
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. | Durian (as of March 2007) |
 GA{{GA-Class}} |
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. | International Space Station (as of February 2007)
|
| B {{B-Class}} |
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. | Munich air disaster (as of May 2006) has a lot of helpful material but contains too many lists, and needs more prose content & references. |
| Start {{Start-Class}} |
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:
|
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. | Real analysis (as of November 2006) |
| Stub {{Stub-Class}} |
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. | Coffee table book (as of July 2005) |
| Disambig {{Disambig-Class}} |
Disambiguation page - "…non-article pages that contain no content and refer users only to other Wikipedia pages…." | "…paths leading to different topic pages that share essentially the same term in their title…." | see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), Wikipedia:Disambiguation | |
| Template {{Template-Class}} |
Template - "…used to add recurring messages to pages in a consistent way, to add boilerplate messages, to create navigational boxes, and to provide cross-language portability of texts." | "…a page which can be inserted into another page via a process called transclusion. It can be considered a wiki subroutine facility...." | see Help:A quick guide to templates | {{Flutefamily}} |
| Category {{Category-Class}} |
Category - "… allow articles to be placed in one or more groups, and allows those groups to be further categorized." | "…provide automatic indexes, that are useful as tables of contents." | see Wikipedia:Categorization | Category:Flutes |
| File {{File-Class}} |
Image - "…an artifact that reproduces the likeness of some subject—usually a physical object or a person." | A well-placed on-topic picture that illustrates the subject and hopefully clarifies any potential misunderstandings. | see Wikipedia:Images or Wikipedia:Extended image syntax | |
| List {{List-Class}} |
List - "… pages that contain primarily a list. The list usually consist of links to articles in a particular subject area, such as people or places or a timeline of events. The title of these entries always begin with the phrase list of or timeline of." | see Wikipedia:List guideline | ||
| NA {{NA-Class}} |
Non-article - portals, topics, sounds, WikiProjects | Wikipedia:WikiProject Volleyball | ||
| Unassessed quality |
Grading for importance edit
The "Importance" grading scheme is used to ascertain the necessity of the article to the overall understanding of Volleyball. This is just within the scope of this WikiProject, not to the entire world! If your article is graded as a "low" (nor "No-") importance, it does not mean your article does not matter, it means that the subject of your article is not particularly necessary for most readers to understand the general subjects within the Volleyball wikiproject - but the article is still important to the general reading public looking for that specific information. Generally, the more specific the subject, the lower the importance.
| Label | General Criteria
Volleyball-Specific Criteria |
Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Top {{Top-importance}} |
Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field.
Volleyball articles that have universal application, not restrained by cultures or geography. |
|
| High {{High-importance}} |
Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent.
Volleyball articles that are extremely important to the understanding of the subject. |
|
| Mid {{Mid-importance}} |
Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area.
A significant Volleyball-related manufacturer or league that has disbanded. |
|
| Low {{Low-importance}} |
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.
The theory behind a part of Volleyball or level of thought used in coaching. |
|
| NA {{NA-importance}} |
Non-article pages, including: pictures, lists, portals, topics, sounds, disambiguation pages, templates, and categories
Pages of content that are about Volleyball, but not articles. (List of sports flooring manufacturers, etc.). |
|
| ??? {{-importance}} |
Unassessed importance
Volleyball-related pages that require assessment. |
Core Topics edit
A discussion on core topics can be found here. Please contribute!