Welcome to the assessment department of the Wikipedia WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia-related articles (for scope, see the WikiProject page). 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 Wikipedia}} banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Wikipedia articles by quality and Category:Wikipedia articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questions edit

See also the general assessment FAQ
1. What is the purpose of the article ratings?
The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
Just add {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. What should I do?
Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
4. Who can assess articles?
Any member of WikiProject Wikipedia is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes.
5. How do I rate an article?
Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
6. 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.
7. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
8. Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are somewhat subjective, 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!
9. What if I have a question not listed here?
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.

Instructions edit

Quality assessments edit

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Wikipedia}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Wikipedia|class=???}}

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

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

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

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

Quality scale edit

Importance assessment edit

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

{{WikiProject Wikipedia|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 Wikipedia articles)  Top 
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Wikipedia articles)  High 
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Wikipedia articles)  Mid 
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Wikipedia articles)  Low 
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Wikipedia articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Wikipedia articles)  ??? 

Importance scale edit

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 Wikipedia.

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.

Requesting an assessment edit

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.

  • Requesting assessment of Transgender people in Nazi Germany, which has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.13tez (talk) 22:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment/reassessment of Dee D. Jackson, which has been significantly expanded upon, cited to a greater extent and brought up to a more encyclopedic state of existence compared to its previous assessment as a stub-class article. TheMysteriousShadeheart (talk) 17:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment/reassessment of Tiziana Rivale, which has been significantly expanded upon, cited to a greater extent and brought up to a more encyclopedic state of existence compared to its previous assessment as a stub-class article. TheMysteriousShadeheart (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Grigory Sverdlin, newly created. CommissarDoggoTalk? 11:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requestig Assessment of Talkata yet to be assessed ⵟⵓⵔⴽⵉⵙⵀⴽⴰⴱⵢⵍ (talk) 18:38, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of Omnichord, a stub class article that has recently been expanded. InDimensional (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of Uvula (band). It was assessed to be a stub on 17 April 2023, but has undergone much expansion since then. Dubna8 (talk) 06:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of Battle of Batumi. It is rated as a start class, although it has been significantly improved recently. Bailer99 (talk) 04:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting re-assessment of Willy's Chocolate Experience. Originally rated as start class on the 28th last month, I believe it's since been improved a whole bunch and WP:RATER now estimates it's at B class. I concur with this, but an unbiased opinion would be appreciated. CommissarDoggoTalk? 17:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done @Voorts Assessed this last night, now B class. CommissarDoggoTalk? 11:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of Maarjamäe, which I expanded on majorly recently. Would the future addition of images (planning to take in spring-summer) affect the assessment? Many thanks. MartinusK (talk) 15:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It would definitely be at least a C class, the Evad37/rater prediction is saying "B or higher" with 90.5% accuracy. I want to also point out the transport section has no sources. Shadow311 (talk) 00:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from February 2024: ⬇
@Georgeykiwi   Done content-wise it's a B-class in my opinion, I rated it "C" only because many of the references are dead, making verification difficult. If you rescue them, please ping me and I'll up the rating. Broc (talk) 11:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Broc i have fixed all of the dead links! thank you :) George (talk) 06:31, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of the Parasram Maderna, which was initially a stub. I have expanded the article a few days ago. $arthakP (talk) 12:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Rohan Bopanna, I have added many sources and expanded the article in last few weeks. PrinceofPunjabTALK 06:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Mexia Supermarket‎, I spent most of my day creating the page on a whim so it'd be nice to get it assessed as I'm thinking of potentially putting it in for a DYK. CommissarDoggoTalk? 19:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done I fixed some minor style issues and rated it B-class as the article is well sourced and detailed; if you want additional feedback let me know. Broc (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Tapir! - I gave it an assessment of C class myself, but I'd like an independent review to see if it hits B class (I think it does, but I might be biased since I wrote it). Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 08:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Paradox of Tolerance. I spent a lot of time expanding this a few weeks ago and requested an assessment via the Philosophy WikiProject, but following the changes to the assessment process I'm resubmitting my request here. Thanks! Ddevault (talk) 09:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of Chachmei Lublin Yeshiva. Article assessed as stub class in WikiProject Poland, and start class in Wikiproject Judaism. Expansions were made, along with some recent note-worthy content. It has been greatly expanded over the past 17 years. NeverBeGameOver (talk) 04:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of Zen of Python. Article is assessed as stub class and I have made some improvements since then [[1]] Erictleung (talk) 19:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Broc (talk) 13:58, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Capital punishment in Georgia (country). Article was assessed as stub class in 2008 and contained only one paragraph back then, but now I have added much more content.Srguan (talk) 20:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Parliament of Georgia. Article was assessed as start class in 2009, but it has undergone many changes since then and has been upgraded significantly.Srguan (talk) 20:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Conservative Party of Japan. Article was made last year and still doesn't have an assessment. Anime King 🎌 (💬) (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Anime King   Done. Small suggestion for improvement: add translations of the Japanese titles in the references. You can use |trans-title= in {{Cite web}}. Broc (talk) 10:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of 2024 Liberal Democratic Party (Japan) leadership election. Article was made last year and still doesn't have an assessment. Anime King 🎌 (💬) (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done Shadow311 (talk) 00:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment for Li Yundi. It was last assessed 17 years ago in 2007. I believe it fits the criteria for B-class.

Also, I would like a reassessment of its importance. I believe it fits the criteria high, as the page is about a world-renowned pianist. Thanks EleniXDD (talk) 09:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wow, thanks for the assess of biography. That’s quick. Is it possible to also assess the two related wiki projects and evaluate their importance. Thanks a lot EleniXDD (talk) 09:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Sydney van Hooijdonk. It is currently rated Stub, and has been since 2019 despite major work on it since. I believe it fits the criteria for C-class, but would like an outside opinion on this, and if not C-class, which class it currently sits in. Christhecoolboy (talk) 16:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Tyler1. To the best of my knowledge it has not had an assessment since the article was first created in 2018. I believe it is a B class or close to it, and I would appreciate feedback to better understand the criteria for BLP articles like this. Mokadoshi (talk) 23:07, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Brownies & Downies. CommissarDoggoTalk? 02:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done I think Start class makes sense here because the majority of the article is specifically about the South African branch which no longer exists. I also believe extraneous detail should be removed. For example, a whole paragraph on Schultz's fiancé is not significantly relevant to a business with over 50 locations. With more English sources about the overall business this article would be greatly improved. I understand the frustration since there aren't many English sources. As an aside, it's worth mentioning that the article relies heavily on references to TimesLive which is on the Usable but be cautious list. I also fixed a minor duplicated reference. Mokadoshi (talk) 07:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, I actually put in a request on WikiProject Netherlands out of a hope that some people there could grab some more info from Dutch sources just to make sure I don't mess up on some translation, but I'll probably end up just doing it myself.
    As for the fiancé situation I forgot to put in what actually made it a problem, the fact that the business was under threat. That being said, I don't think it was ever really specified why the business was under threat because of her being barred from the country so I'll probably just remove that para entirely. CommissarDoggoTalk? 10:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Nikos Goumas article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done Shadow311 (talk) 19:22, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Dimitris Volonakis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Michalis Simigdalas article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Spyros Pomonis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Andreas Theodoropoulos article which I created.BEN917 10:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Babis Psimogiannos article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Nikos Stathopoulos article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Spyros Stefanidis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Giorgos Skrekis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @BEN917   Done rated as Start but the article has major sourcing issues, most of the statements in the page are unsourced. Please reach out if you need help with referencing. Broc (talk) 13:41, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Lazaros Papadopoulos (footballer) article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done I left some questions regarding the sources on the talk page. Lets discuss more there. Mokadoshi (talk) 07:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Apostolos Toskas article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Dionysis Tsamis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Broc (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Giannis Mousouris article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Michalis Tzirakis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Spyros Thodis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Stavros Letsas article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Panagiotis Stylianopoulos article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Giorgos Peppes article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Stavros Stamatis article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Kostas Vasiliou article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the Dimitris Pittas article which I created.BEN917 10:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Srettha Thavisin, which has been significantly updated and expanded over the past weeks. Thanks! Bossza007 Here (talk) 02:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from January 2024: ⬇
  • Requesting a reassessment of Bertram Fletcher Robinson, which has been significantly updated and expanded over the past few months and which, now also includes new original material and images. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksamil (talkcontribs) 16:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Bruno Gaido, which I have been working on for a while and is now far more comprehensive than it was at its last assessment in January 2022 Wasianpower (talk) 17:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment for Émile Pouget, which I've significantly expanded and which was previously Stub class. --Aleksamil (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment for Irish folklore, last assessed in 2018 and is much more detailed since then. Splatterxltalk 00:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for the 1993 in Georgia (country) article which I created.Srguan (talk) 08:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Donuts (album). It was last assessed in 2007 and has improved since then. मल्ल (talk) 04:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Old Ironsides (trophy) as it has previously surpassed its current start-class designation. Dionysius Millertalk 14:26, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting re-assessment of Globe effect, which is no longer a stub.Merlitz (talk) 08:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done I confirm Begocc C-class rating, I only made minor stylistic corrections. Broc (talk) 20:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting re-assessment(last was 2012) of Dalit literature, I've since added region and language specific content Rater says B or higher (91.4%) --Miximon (talk) 02:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of Deficit 83 Lines. (AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 02:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of article Chechen Revolution - wrote an article about the event. Previously was a redirect. Relahs (talk) 19:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done by Begocc. Two notes from my side, @Relahs: have a look at WP:SRF for instructions on how to cite the same work multiple times with different pages, and add more wikilinks :) Broc (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment 3D-Jury after I've worked on improving this former stub status article, the status of which I've removed. Thanks for your review! Erictleung (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done by Begocc shown here here Erictleung (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of both the Tui T. Sutherland and Wings of Fire (novel series) pages. With deepest gratitude offered to all those involved, I have led the charge in undertaking major overhauls of the entirety of the content of the aforementioned articles, respectively commencing these efforts in August 2022 and January 2023. Seeing as to how these pages have changed exponentially since these efforts were launched, it appears that a quality assessment is again in order. Considering the interdisciplinary output of the affiliated WikiProjects these pages are related, coupled with my consistent presence on these pages (simultaneously preventing vandalism/fancruft and holistically improving sections), an "outsider's" perspective would be most welcome at this time. As always, feedback is welcome and greatly appreciated; I thank you in advance for your time and consideration! ^^ TheMysteriousShadeheart (talk) 05:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment on List of chief ministers of Andhra Pradesh, which I have worked on the leads of the article and the sub sections along with reformatting the tables with a better version and I think it deserves more than a list rating. 456legendtalk 15:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment on both History of the Aurès and Talkata Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ⵟⵓⵔⴽⵉⵙⵀⴽⴰⴱⵢⵍ (talkcontribs) 14:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Downtown Rail Extension which is the most complete article I've created and has had contributions from a plurality of editors. -MJ (talk) 22:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Open Source Tripwire which I expanded from stub yesterday. Deltaspace42 (talkcontribs) 20:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a newer assessment of Clueless, which has had its Production and Release sections expanded. Thank you. Spectrallights (talk) 07:24, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jews in Madagascar is for sure not a stub anymore. Zanahary (talk) 10:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Rating already updated by Generalissima. Thanks :) Broc (talk) 14:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the recent ICJ filing the Palestinian genocide accusation article is much more important. Perhaps its importance should be updated, if needed? Scientelensia (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The ‘Mid’ tag on the Abu Haggag Mosque article is probably justified, but the article is no longer a stub. Scientelensia (talk) 17:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done@Scientelensia: I can't judge the importance, but I updated the rating to C-class. I also tagged a couple dead links, there is space for further improvement to the article. Broc (talk) 13:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you so much! Scientelensia (talk) 15:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bob Orders has, in my estimation, proper citations and improved organization which place it around C-class as opposed to start class. Given the minor shift from start to C as the request this is very low priority. Dionysius Millertalk 13:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done@Dionysius Miller: I upped it to C. In my opinion it could even be a B-rated article, but the lead needs some work following MOS:CITELEAD. Broc (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Broc Thanks a bunch! I was completely unaware of the standards for citations in non-BLP leads. I changed those a bit and cleaned it up visually. Dionysius Millertalk 14:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Old Sydney Town, was previously a start article and I've done a lot of work to re-write and cite information. Thank you!! Cheers, GossieGoodTimes (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of Bertram Fletcher Robinson. I have added fully referenced and original photographs and content to this article over the past few months and I now believe it fulfils the standard required for GA standard. Therefore, please can I request a reassessment and/or feedback about how to achieve a GA rating for this article. Thanks so much in anticipation of assistance with this request.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.214.91 (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of Nubian ibex. I've added a lot of content over the last several months, bringing it from Start-Class to C-Class. Following further edits with in-depth citations, I would like to get the article to B-Class (and ideally GA when possible). Thank you, Bbreslau (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of Thailand. Major cleanup tags were removed, in addition to some content rewrite, which might need a quality reassessment from external observers for impartiality.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kornkaobat (talkcontribs) 13:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of History of fantasy. Massive swathes of unsourced or questionably relevant information, all written in a partisan, essayist style. Recently merged with another article so I can only hope the issues were a result of that because there is no way an article this bad should have slipped forward to B-class. Some of the sources are also derived directly from modern authors like Moorcock which seems like it could easily lead to biased writing - Fantasy is a form of genre fiction first and foremost, a work simply having supernatural elements does not warrant inclusion here without strong corroboration. Orchastrattor (talk) 21:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a re-assessment of Emblem of Andhra Pradesh. It was in a stub category on the mainspace with start class assessment on it's talk page when I first took up the task to improve it. I have left some considerable amount of time after my development of the article to consider any more user requests and other consideration and everything seems to be fine now. 456legendtalk 08:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done @456legend: the article lacks clarity. There are too many foreign words without explanation or links, which makes it almost impossible to understand for a casual reader. If clarity is improved, it could be upped to C-class. Ping me if you need help. Broc (talk) 16:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Broc I apologize for not addressing this earlier. I have now rectified the issue and provided clarification for the words. Could you please review the article now? 456legendtalk 03:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a re-assessment of Circa (company), I added some more details to it, some more references and pushed it past what I would see as a stub - looking for some eyes on it to see whether I'm right on that. Thanks in advance. CommissarDoggoTalk? 19:09, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done - CommissarDoggo, I updated from Stub to Start-class along with a few suggestions at Talk page, Assessment section. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 21:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from December 2023: ⬇
  • Requesting a re-assessment of Liquid consonant, which I have restructured and to which I have added significantly more information. I hope this is also an improvement. Thank you! IlmarisenVasara 22:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a re-assessment of Kamikaze Hearts, which I had initially assessed as C on 10 December 2022, but I feel that significant improvements have been made since then. Thanks! ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 21:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @HelenDegenerate: nice article! I found two issues with sources which I tagged with {{cn}} and {{failed verification}}, once they are solved I would rate it B-class.
    Broc (talk) 14:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment of article on the Oesterdam. I have overhauled this as it was previously just a redirect link to the main Delta Works article. I've made it into an article on this dam (the longest in the Delta Works) in its own right. Thanks. D McParland (talk) 20:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of articles on Delhi Transport Corporation and Delhi Ring Railway, which I have improved a lot over the past few weeks. Thank you. Kool Nerd 123 (talk) 07:35, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kia ora, requesting an assessment of Crate Day, I've updated it to include more background about its origins and related events but not sure if it falls under Start or C now. Cheers. Dudsud (talk) 12:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Upgraded to C-class; good work Dudsud! It looks like another editor had already bumped it to start-class. For images you may want to check: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Beer_crates Something lacking in the current article is a description of the celebration: to what degree is it a joke, to what degree is it celebrated, how widely, how is it (aside from the becoming drunk part) celebrated. Some parts cited to primary sources on Facebook like "mainstream rock radio station The Rock started The Rock National Crate Day" should be cited to secondary sources if possible. Rjjiii (talk) 05:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Police jury. This is largely a rewrite of an article that did not originally cite sources. Thanks in advance, Rjjiii (talk) 16:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done, Updated to Start class, article needs a tad bit more referencing, but with a few general improvements it will probably become a C-class, Nice job! Begocci (talk) 09:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an updated assessment of The Patriots (TV series) which is no longer categorised as a stub. I have made minor improvements to the article, but it seems to be above Stub level. Reader781 (talk) 02:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Reader781: I rated it Start. It would need at least a synopsis to make it to C-class. --Broc (talk) 14:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an updated assessment of Rudolph Glossop which I have expanded and added a number of citations too. Thank you! D McParland (talk) 21:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @D McParland, details at Talk; assessed as C-class and with a few improvements definitely B-class article. Cheeers, JoeNMLC (talk) 13:43, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's great, thank you D McParland (talk) 13:48, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I kindly request that these articles are assessed. Ọjà and Firewood in Nigeria. Thanks. --Olugold (talk) 10:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of No Pants Day which I have improved from a stub. I did not add pants. Cheers! BBQboffingrill me 05:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Rashmika Mandanna that I completely rewrote and added reliable sources to, along with the addition of her work that was uncovered previously. Thank you! Iknowthingsaboutstuff1 (talk) 13:31, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of INS Mahendragiri that I started a few months ago. Thanks!Davidindia (talk) 05:09, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done @Davidindia: it's a rather short page (194 words), which still gets categorized as a stub per WP:STUBDEF. I haven't changed the rating, but feel free to ping me once you expand the article further! I added a couple tags to the article, and made some style changes. Broc (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks a lot! My first article on war ships, so wanted a senior editor to check. Thanks and regards! Davidindia (talk) 15:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Done - Davidindia, changed article from Stub to Start-class per Rater assessment tool prediction. JoeNMLC (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Karnataka Motor Sports Club. Thanks! Davidindia (talk) 05:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Automotive industry in China. I have almost rewritten the article and I'm hoping someone could give me opinions on how to improve it by reclassifying it. Thank you! Infinty 0 (talk) 11:38, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of North–South Corridor, Singapore. I believe I have significantly expanded the original content and should not be a stub-class any more. Would like someone to help give their opinions on how it could be reclassified. Thank you! Chee Cheong Fun (talk) 08:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of a new page Personality neuroscience created by me. Thank you! AbyssMoon124 (talk) 20:31, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done Shadow311 (talk) 19:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of a new page I made: Ecological empathy. Thank you! Zen Buddhista (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Zen Buddhista - assessed to C-class article for now. See Talk "Article assessment" for details. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 17:38, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for all the additions you made to my article, @JoeNMLC! I love all the Wikilinks you put in. I added a more substantial summary to the lead section (thank you for that suggestion!) and added more Wikipedia links throughout the article. Is it possible to have a reassessment? Thanks for your help with my article! Zen Buddhista (talk) 21:00, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a new assessment of Yoshito Hori-assessed as a "Start" back in 2019. I significantly overhauled it since and this biography might qualify as a B. Much appreciated! Furoba (talk) 03:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Remembrance Day (Hong Kong), which I recently created by translating the article in Chinese and would appreciate any feedback. Thank you! CanonNi (talk) 23:57, 7 December 2023
      Done @CanonNi - I've assessed this as Start class for now. The main problems are the quality of references. Looking specifically at the Origins section, one of the references is permanently dead, and the citation at the end of the 2nd paragraph only seems to provide a reference to that last sentence and nothing before it (but I can't tell for certain). Lastly, the last sentence in the article has a reference to photos on Facebook, which makes me think this is original research. I'm assuming you can find some English references to the history portions of the article - there is no requirement for English references, but it makes assessment easier. If you improve this further, please submit another request, and feel free to ping me directly to get a quicker response if you want. Mokadoshi (talk) 02:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a new assessment of Guy Lombardo-now assessed as a "Start". New sections, reference citations, audio links, and additional content has been added & this musician's biography might qualify as a B or GA (a nomination has been posted). Since Lombardo was known as "Mr. New Year's Eve" a speedy review might be useful just in time for the Holiday! Enjoy!. Ciao160.72.80.178 (talk) 15:32, 7 December 2023 (UTC)NHPL[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Portal hypertension, I updated this for a class & would appreciate any feedback. Thank you. Skam1279 (talk) 17:45, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Utopian thinking, I created this page mainly summarizing social psychological research on it. I would appreciate any feedback. Thank you! --- Kiwimiho (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2023‎
  • Requesting an assessment of Friendship, I added two sections (evolutionary approach and friendship jealousy) and made major changes to the Non-human friendship section (formerly Inter-species friendship). Thank you! --NRodbruin (talk) 16:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)NRodbruin[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Ecocide, any feedback on specific improvements that can be made really appreciated. John Cummings (talk) 07:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Rome Statute, any feedback on specific changes that can be worked on very much appreciated (thinking about trying to get it to FA). Thanks John Cummings (talk) 07:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of International Criminal Court, any feedback on specific changes that can be worked on very much appreciated (thinking about trying to get it to FA). Thanks John Cummings (talk) 07:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Outgroup Favoritism, a psychological bias contrasting ingroup favoritism. Lcupal (talk) 12:05, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done Shadow311 (talk) 19:24, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from November 2023: ⬇
  • Requesting an assessment of Marineros de Ensenada, a Mexican minor league baseball team. JTtheOG (talk) 22:43, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done Begocci (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 🔶 Requesting a reassessment of Sinus tarsi syndrome, which I have done my best to improve to bring it up to A class with the input of the peer review. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of 2023 Micronesian constitutional referendum, which has been overhauled over the last month and is definitely not a stub anymore. Wherethetacos (talk) 04:43, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Wherethetacos: Assessed at C class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Intimate relationship following a recent rewrite and overhaul. A.mollusk (talk) 04:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @A.mollusk: Assessed at B class, only because higher classes need more than one person's input. This article has really come a long way! Left my feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Good luck with your GA nomination! Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much for your feedback! A.mollusk (talk) 17:30, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request reassessment of Susan Schulz. Hopefully my edits have taken it from Stub-class to Start-class.LowellMillGirl (talk) 05:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @LowellMillGirl: Assessed at Start class like you asked. I left some feedback in the edit summary - very good work considering you're a new editor. If you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you @Pear1020. I really appreciate the feedback! LowellMillGirl (talk) 16:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request reassessment of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. Article is currently rated Start class, but has substantial sourcing. I have shortened the plot summary and cut down an EXAMPLEFARM to bring it in line with current standards and policy. Hopefully, the newly overhauled article rates at least C Class by now. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Just Another Cringy Username: Article reassessed at B class by Nick Moyes, though I'm sure you're already aware. Posting this here for record keeping purposes. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Elizabeth Greenfield following an expansion; hopefully no longer Start Class. Rubystaramaryllis (talk) 16:51, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Rubystaramaryllis: Assessed at C class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:33, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Michael Kremer following a recent rewrite; hopefully no longer Start Class. RegMonkey (talk) 16:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @RegMonkey: Assessed at B class. I didn't have anything to say - the article is pretty much flawless from my perspective. If you have any questions let me know. Good luck with the GA nomination! Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Carl Værnet following a recent overhaul. Zenomonoz (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Zenomonoz: Assessed at B class. Good job fleshing out the article. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 18:04, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Neil Robinson (baseball) Onagtruk (talk) 19:51, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  Done @Onagtruk: Assessed as C-class. See talk page for details. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 04:01, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Statistical system of Bosnia and Herzegovina AriTheHorse 05:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @AriTheHorse: Assessed as B class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 18:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Mexican actor Jorge Russek. JTtheOG (talk) 02:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @JTtheOG: Assessed as C class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 18:13, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article MegaCon has been overhauled in the past couple months from a starter class article reading like incomplete tidbits of info into an informative read with much cited research done into the event's history. I'd say this could be a B or even GA class article now. ShadowDragon343 (talk) 01:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @ShadowDragon343 Assessed as C class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 18:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I edited both Battle of Cynoscephalae and Pee curl a whole bunch in order to fix some issues (distinct lack of citations (template had been there since 2015) and other historical issues that came with it on Battle of Cynoscephalae - issues in translation, citations and additionally just fleshing out the article on pee curl) and was wondering whether both could potentially be assessed. CommissarDoggo (talk) 14:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Partly done @CommissarDoggo:
    • Battle of Cynoscephalae assessed at B class. Thank you for improving the article's sourcing! I left some feedback in the edit summary.
    • Pee curl still has significant issues with the amount of citations (as detailed in the maintenance template), so I have left it at C class.
    Please let me know if you have any questions. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 18:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No questions, just glad they've been looked at and proper pleased that the battle was re-assessed, I just wish I could've found more citations for it than I did. Thanks! CommissarDoggoTalk? 19:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have updated the Marcus Rediker page. It's definitely not stub class anymore. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 06:26, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Pac-Man PHD:   Done Reassessed as B-class. Thriftycat TalkContribs 21:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 09:44, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from October 2023: ⬇
  • Another article I've edited, Aberffraw, Anglesey is no longer a start class because of my additions and needs a better rating. But more importantly, Talk:Aberffraw is listed as Wikiproject city, which it is not, it's a village, and in the talk rating, it is also listed as a Celts project, not too sure about that either, maybe the House of Aberffraw, perhaps a review is needed of the article interests. Cltjames (talk) 18:46, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please take a look at the descriptions of each WP:PROJECT, "towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia" are under the coverage of WP:CITIES, and "modern day Celtic nations" are under the coverage of WP:CELTS.
    Hope this helps and hope you get a reassessment soon~ ^^ - azpineapple | T/C 09:02, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. Titus Gold (talk) 01:51, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, requesting Hughes-Hunter baronets article which I've slightly improved, it's no longer a stub. Cltjames (talk) 03:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Cltjames Assessed as Start class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 14:01, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, requesting a connected article, Ellis-Nanney baronets reassessment from the start class, a lot of work was conducted by myself on the article a month ago, and it hasn't been assessed since.Cltjames (talk) 03:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Cltjames: Assessed as B-class. Good job fleshing it out. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 14:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for that assessment. It was originally a redirect, and I felt there I'd written a sufficient article for Hugh Ellis-Nanney to separate into 2. Although both are relatively small, the information about the person and his baronetcy is much improved, and also correctly structured for readers to enjoy learning his biography and peerage. Cltjames (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Hugh Ellis-Nanney please, worked on it a few years ago and fine-tuned the article over the past few months. Cltjames (talk) 03:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Cltjames: Assessed as B-class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 14:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting reassessment of West Point, New York. I've worked on it for a while, and I'm just curious where my contributions got it to. Thanks! ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ 03:09, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Relativity: Assessed as B-class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting (re)assessment of Flyover (Apple Maps). Have added a considerable amount since it was AFC accepted, and I would like to know if the article is C-class yet, or if it still needs more work to get there. 47.227.95.73 (talk) 12:06, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @47.227.95.73: Assessed as C-class. Good job on improving the article! I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request reassessment of Tom Ripley. Article is currently rated as Start class, but has substantial RS. I have also removed a good deal of fluff and original research, resulting in a tighter, more substantive article. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 04:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Reassessed as C Class by Nick Moyes. Posting this for record-keeping.
    Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 17:45, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello, I am requesting an assessment check of Adolf, King of Germany to see if it is B-class worthy. It would be much appreciated by the Holy Roman Empire Task Force. Thank you. User:Momgamer09 (User talk:Momgamer09)
      Not done @Momgamer09: While the article is very fleshed out, there simply aren't enough citations to bring it up to B class. Please let me know if you have any questions. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t have any questions. I’ll help work on adding more citations. Thanks for the feedback. Momgamer09 (talk) 13:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I am requesting an assessment of Rubina Yadav, please. Much appreciated! Davidindia (talk) 17:37, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Davidindia[reply]
      Done OP reassessed as Start class. Posting here for record keeping purposes. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:31, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello—I'm requesting a re-assessment of Saskatoon Valkyries, please. I appreciate it! Other justin (talk) 02:07, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Other justin: Assessed as C-class. Great job fleshing it out. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:37, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to request a re-assessment of Konecranes. It has a stub assessment but I added content to it and is now much larger. In my opinion it does not fit that assessment anymore. Yökyöpeli (talk) 16:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Xujing. Currently unassessed and I have just expanded it recently. - azpineapple | T/C 07:06, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done @Azpineapple, Assessed as start-class. See assessment details here on Talk page. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 02:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! I'll definitely work on this article further once I have time :) - azpineapple | T/C 08:58, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Cool cool, I should also let you know I recovered two of the sources with IABot after my assessment, so the dead links are no longer an issue. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 00:43, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It appears stats.gov.cn had just decided to move these to a different subdomain. I've found the updated links and added them to the article so all good in that respect now :) - azpineapple | T/C 08:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am requesting an assessment for Exercise Cambrian Patrol, it is currently Start-class but I have improved it massively. Dolphinwaxer (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done @Dolphinwaxer: The article has no citations and is quite short, making it not qualify for C class at this time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:47, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Mercedes-Benz EQE SUV. I have expanded it significantly, and does not fit into the start-class category. I would say this article belongs well into either the B- or C-Class category QuattrostagioniIV (talk) 08:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done @QuattrostagioniIV: While the article is well written and cited, it is still quite short and therefore does not quite qualify for C class at this time. Please let me know if you have any questions. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment for Armenians in Azerbaijan. It's currently rated as stub-class, but definitely doesn't fit in that category. I'm not the one who expanded it, I've just come across it. Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 22:50, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Sawyer-mcdonell: Assessed as C-class. Good catch! I left some feedback in the edit summary for anyone who is interested, though I know CTOPs are more difficult to fix up. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 15:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to request a re-assessment of Weak (AJR song). The article is now much larger than the previous stub assessment. Thanks. Koopastar (talk) 04:20, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Koopastar: Assessed as C class by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, though I'm sure you're already aware. Posting this here for record-keeping purposes. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:02, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from September 2023: ⬇
  • Greetings, requesting an assessment for Lafayette L. Foster's article, which I have recently expanded. Aquabluetesla (talk) 18:16, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Aquabluetesla: Assessed as C class by Demt1298, though I'm sure you're already aware. Posting this here for record-keeping purposes. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please can I request an assessment for Bertram Fletcher Robinson, which has been significantly improved since its last assessment some fourteen years ago. Thanks in advance. Prspiring (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done @Prspiring: While the article is so close to A class, there are some sections missing citations that make it just fall short. A few more citations and it is an easy A class. Frankly there's nothing that couldn't be ironed out in the GA nomination, if you're willing to go that route. Please let me know if you have any questions. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:50, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of K-Meleon, after rewrite. Thanks in advance, Rjjiii(talk) 08:15, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Rjjiii: Assessed as B-class. Agree with the peer reviewer, pretty close to GA. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Facundo Torres, which I have greatly expanded upon, mostly back in July. Thanks! :) ~~ Raskuly (talk) 02:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Raskuly: Assessed as B class. Great work! I left some feedback in the edit summary, though I had really nothing to say, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask.Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Burn the House Down (song), which has received a high amount of expansion from me. Thank you. Koopastar (talk) 06:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Koopastar: Assessed as start-class. A few statements are unsourced, and the lead could use some work. A few of your sources (youtube, imdb, twitter if possible) also need to be replaced with more reliable ones. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:09, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • i request that someone assess Gunggari people, which i've been expanding recently. thanks. Yainsley (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Yainsley: Assessed as C-class. Some of the statements are unsourced. History6042 (talk) 21:31, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am formally requesting that the articles Mel Carnahan and 2000 United States Senate election in Missouri be re-evaluated. I have made significant edits to them, and I believe their current ratings are outdated. Thank you. FountofInterestingInfo (talk) 19:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Mel Carnahan: Assessed as C-class. Some simple feedback on article talk page. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 19:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Reassessed as B-class following completion of suggested edits. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 19:10, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Choose Love (film) has recently been expanded, mostly by me, following the film's release. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 21:37, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @CopperyMarrow15: Assessed as C class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Pear1020, I have added a citation as you suggested. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 18:16, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @CopperyMarrow15: Good job! I went ahead and reassessed it as B class. Great work on the article. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 14:04, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of De Olde Molen. This article has been expanded significantly and would benefit from an assessment to ensure it meets Wikipedia's standards. Thank you. Kallmemel (talk) 15:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Kallmemel: Assessed as B class. Good work here, I know these relatively obscure subjects are difficult to source so well. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 16:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting a reassessment of Jonathan Allen (journalist). JoeNMLC believed that the article was worthy of being assessed by people more familiar with the subject and/or political journalism. The WP:RATER tool shows "Class B, or better" at 95 percent prediction. I would just like to improve this article as much as I can. Thank you. Pac-Man PHD (talk) 00:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Pac-Man PHD: Assessed as B class by ClydeFranklin, though I'm sure you're already aware. Posting this here for record-keeping purposes. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Jonathan Allen (journalist). I made several changes to the article (such as adding images and rewording sentences to make them less redundant) since it was initially assessed.Pac-Man PHD (talk) 14:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done - Upgraded from class Start to class C. See article's Talk for assessment details. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 15:36, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from August 2023: ⬇
  • Requesting an assessment of 2023 Premier Lacrosse League Season. I've recently done a string of improvements to the article that I think puts it at C-class. It's difficult for me to assess the article myself as I've never assessed an article before and the leagues size makes it difficult to compare to similar articles like that of the NFL. I plan to continue revising the article but I would like to know where it currently stands. Thank you. Jsfxmn(talk) 4:28, 5 August 2023 UTC
      Done @Jsfxmn: Assessed as C class. I left some feedback in the edit summary, if you would like me to further elaborate feel free to ask. Pear 2.0 (say hi!) 17:51, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting an assessment of Smallhythe Place after a campaign of improvements. I think it's B-class, but having never self-assessed before I'd appreciate an expert opinion. Thank you.Isaksenk (talk) 18:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @Isaksenk: sorry for the long wait :) I only fixed a couple style issues and upped the rating to B-class, good job! Broc (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Amazing, thanks @Broc for the guidance! Isaksenk (talk) 16:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 🔶 Obturator hernia my group has made substantial edits to the page, including citations of systematic reviews that are relevant to date and would like to be reassessed for a C-Class or B-class article. Thank you. User: immanueltjahjadi (talk) 11:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from July 2023: ⬇
  • 🔶 Tilaka requesting a reassessment from it's current rating as a start class article. Some clean up and copyediting was done to the article. Chilicave (talk)
  • 🔶 Jamie Muscato I've expanded upon the article and made revisions. I would like to see if it would still remain in C-Class standards. Arsoniel (talk) 13:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment for Ed Bodin, in the time since it was last accessed the article has heavily increased in quality. DvcDeBlvngis (talk) 14:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done Assessed as Start-class, rather than C-class as a lot of information about his life is not covered/known. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from June 2023: ⬇
  • 🔶 Requesting assessment of Deep diving. Expanded and referenced. Was assessed C-class in September 2009. Alfie↑↓© 12:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Not done @Alfie66: there are too many sourcing issues, including a section completely unreferenced. I would suggest you to focus on those rather than further expansion, as the content is there. Once the issues are solved, the article could be upped to B-class. Broc (talk) 15:28, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 🔶 I am requesting a review of sections 2-7 of Chinese Legalism. I am not requesting a review of sections beyond this, as I have not much worked on and reviewed the sections beyond this, they are older. I am only requesting a review of the writing, concept, the content, the organization. As to the sourcing, the sourcing should be there, but my sources have become disjointed in places with rewriting, I am working on reconfirming and properly organizing them, which can be seen in some places. And I would of course have to introduce additional source content.FourLights (talk) 16:22, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requests from 2023, January to May
➡ Requests from May 2023: ⬇
  • Prunus salicina Revised significantly, and expanded on; no longer start-class, maybe B or C class. Would appreciate assessment or feedback. --Kai Retter (talk) 22:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    •   Done Assessed as C-class. Recommend copyediting (e.g. WP:GOCE) for further improvement. Vaticidalprophet 00:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Thank you for the assessment! Is there any specific copyediting you'd recommend? Kai Retter (talk) 13:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from April 2023: ⬇
  • Assessment requested for Pusheen. Several users (including myself) have made cleanup edits and slight expansions to the article over the past several months. I just noticed that the article is still showing up as a Stub. Top5a (talk) 23:04, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done already, it looks like User:Ipigott assessed the article a few months back bumping it from stub to C class. It's definitely well past a stub. Thanks for improving the article Top5a! C class seems appropriate. Several sentences are not cited (B-class criteria 1), and the article is not quite at Criteria 2 for coverage. See The Yellow Kid for an example of types of coverage going beyond the popularity and merchandising. Good luck, Rjjiii (talk) 05:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting assessment for 1984 New York City Subway shooting, which was recently promoted to GA status.--Jerome Frank Disciple (talk) 21:42, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Done GA status is the current assessment and seems correct. FA status requires an FA review. One issue to be addressed before an FA review or project-specific A-class review, is that the article uses a great number of duplicated citations and sometimes includes lower quality sources like Fox News when the higher qualities sources in the same grouping of 2-5 citations likely cover the material. Rjjiii (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Already done - @Magonz - Article was moved on 16 December 2023‎. Upgraded to B-Class (Rater assessment tool) on 22 December 2023‎. See article's Talk History for details. JoeNMLC (talk) 00:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done - @1namesake1, At article Talk I added WP Engineering, WP Sports. The Rater assessement tool shows ORES prediction of 73.1% for Class-B. For now, I set at Class-Start level. Anyone else here is welcome to re-evaluate and possibly upgrade. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 21:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! 1namesake1 (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done on 26 January 2024‎ - @JoelleJay - see article's Talk History for Class-B upgrade details. JoeNMLC (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eric Harroun I gave this page a glowup, I'd argue it meets Good Article standards imo. The article is pretty complete in terms of info; there's not much more reliable info available on him outside of what's currently included. There's also no copyright-free photos of him, based on some searching. I included several general relevant images Toobigtokale (talk) 03:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    •   Done Assessed as B-class. I agree it's pretty close to GA. As he's deceased, you can use a fair use image without worrying about copyright. Vaticidalprophet 00:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Thanks, didn't know about the deceased fair use thing! toobigtokale (talk) 01:52, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from March 2023: ⬇
  •   Done Assessed by someone else as B-class back in March 2022. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from February 2023: ⬇
  • Requesting reassessment for Nikki Budzinski. This was the version assessed as start-class in May. I think it has improved in quality, perhaps to a C-class, with edits from myself and others, but more importantly it is not low-importance anymore: there are 17 US representatives from Illinois. Heavy Water (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done - @Heavy Water, article remains at Class-Start for now. See article's Talk for assessment for details. JoeNMLC (talk) 21:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi there - I am in the process of updating and revising Nursing in Australia and while there is still much to achieve, I feel it is of a higher status than a "start" article. Could someone please have a look, rate, and provide advice. Thanks Adamm (talkcontribs) 01:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done Assessment remains Class Start, needing improvements for upgrade to a Class C level. See article's Talk for details. JoeNMLC (talk) 02:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Done Assessed as only just scraping through to merit C-class. Still insufficient content based on independent sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kevin Laland has been expanded and a name change has been documented. Would like to request a new assessment and also seek advice on changing the title of the page. FlybellFly (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

➡ Requests from January 2023: ⬇
Requests from 2022
  • Requests from 2022: ⬇
  • Requesting assessment for Political editing on Wikipedia. The previously-assessed version was a WP:STUB, and that's no longer the case. With thanks. François Robere (talk) 08:12, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Already done by a different editor. Assessed as list class. (Article was moved) ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 19:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Donald Cline - (Project: Lowest quality high-popularity articles). Article currently unassessed. Added stub tag and expanded article. This article can still be expanded but should now be sufficient to classify. Thanks. Wikijenitor (talk) 19:06, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Done though not by me. According to the talk page, this article has been assessed as B-class. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 20:45, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jenn Colella — extensively revised and expanded. Self-upgraded from 'Start' to 'C' class on March 11th, but with work now substantively complete, would appreciate an objective opinion for the article's current grade. Thank you. ~ OldBeeg (talk) 10:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Done @OldBeeg, belated assessment details here at article Talk page. Remain Class-C for now. JoeNMLC (talk) 10:04, 25 October 2023‎ (UTC)[reply]
  • The article The Benza was first ranked in 2019 and has been expanded on since then greatly. If someone has time, a reassessment would be appreciated. Thank you!-Craft777 (talk)14:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Done Assessed as C-class. Season plot sections are a bit long, and the "Plot" section was a copyvio which I removed. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:14, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment log edit

Wikipedia 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.


March 19, 2024 edit

Removed edit

March 16, 2024 edit

Assessed edit

March 15, 2024 edit

Assessed edit

March 13, 2024 edit

Reassessed edit

Removed edit