Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lebanon/Assessment

From scratch

I'm posting here to get everyone's opinion on what grading scheme for assessment we should follow. I think it's best to use the conventional grade scheme for article quality and the importance scale used by the Wikipedia Release Version team and WikiProject Canada respectively (both shown below). What do you think?

Proposed grading scheme

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Class	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA	The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured article criteria: A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes. It is: well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard; comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate; neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of: a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.	Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.[under discussion]	Cleopatra (as of June 2018)
FL	The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured list criteria: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations. (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly. (c) Accessibility. It uses proper formating to be accessible to all readers. Bulleted and unbulleted lists and tables are structured correctly. Visual media, if included, utilize alternative (alt) text. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.	Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available.	List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018)
A	The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria The article meets the A-Class criteria: Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history).	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting.	Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help.	Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014)
GA	The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria A good article is: Well-written: the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); it contains no original research; and it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication.	Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.	Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019)
B	The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.	Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.	A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines.	Psychology (as of January 2024)
C	The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.	Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.	Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.	Wing (as of June 2018)
Start	An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following: A useful picture or graphic Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article	Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more.	Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use.	Ball (as of September 2014)
Stub	A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria.	Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant.	Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014)
List	Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area.	There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader.	Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized.	List of literary movements

Proposed importance scale

We will of course have to make some modifications to this scale (e.g. replacing Canada with Lebanon).

Label	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editor's experience	Example
Top	The article is one of the core topics about Canada. Generally, this is limited to those articles that are listed on {{Canada topics}}	A reader who is not involved in Canada will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily.	Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages.	Canada, Provinces and territories of Canada
High	The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding specific topics about Canada or general topics about parts of Canada	Most readers will have some knowledge of the subject	Articles at this level cover particular issues related to Canada, specific terms are used to detail the topic	British Columbia, Prime Minister of Canada
Mid	The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in Canada.	Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject	Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand Canada. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text.	Jasper National Park, Flag of the Governor General of Canada
Low	The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of Canada, but may cover topics related to Canada.	Few readers outside of Canada or that are not within the local area of the article's topic may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article.	Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of Canada, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed.	Villages of Alberta, Canada's grand railway hotels

LestatdeLioncourt ^talk 14:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, this is great. I think it would be a great resource and help focus our efforts. --Xtcrider 18:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

nice work lioncourt, it will surely help us expand and improve lebanese related articles. Fedayee 19:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks even though I can't take credit for this work :). But it is essential for us to start assessing articles in order to determine which ones need more care and have a more well-defined scope of operation. I will be working on the main assessment page this week. I hope you can all join with the assessment efforts. And please call me Lestat. LestatdeLioncourt ^talk 19:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

These are great! I think they'll be really useful for helping us focus our attention on where it's needed most. — George Saliba ^[talk] 23:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Super!... Great Start, LeStat... I am still unfamiliar with things like classes, etc... When I have time, I will catch up. One thing I want to mention is that many articles about Lebanon specifically need Lebanese Editors who are a native speakers of Lebanese and have "accurate" familarity with Lebanon. I am not sure how to incorporate this yet... Lcnj 08:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Just a quick remark, I think that's a very good work Lestat, these categories and grading scheme are suitable. for the moment, i'm little bit 'overbooked' and far away from home, i'll 'study' in detail what you've proposed in a week. Captainm 11:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Added assessment to template

I've added the assessment (rating and importance) to the WikiProject Lebanon Template. Please take a look. — George Saliba ^[talk] 10:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I've filled in Lebanon's values (GA and top) on the Lebanon talk page as an example of what it looks like. — George Saliba ^[talk] 10:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I've added the categories automatically generated by the template to the page. While these categories don't exist (as nobody has written any text on the pages yet), they are still functional and correctly list articles with that tag. The largest of the categories right now are obviously unassessed Lebanon articles and unknown-importance Lebanon articles. If someone wants to write some text on these category pages explaining what they are and how people can help I think that would be useful. — George Saliba ^[talk] 11:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hats off to you George! Spectacular work~ I'll see what help I can give you with these categories. Adding just a sentence or two to each would be sufficient I think, so it shouldn't be too much trouble. —LestatdeLioncourt 14:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)