Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Assessment
WikiProject Korea |
---|
|
Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Korea! This department focuses on assessing the quality and importance of Wikipedia's Korea-related articles. 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 Korea}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Korea-related articles by quality and Category:Korea-related articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Frequently asked questions
[edit]- How can I get my article rated?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- Do the ratings matter?
- Not really; most non-Wikipedians are unaware that they exist. Ratings are mostly tools for letting the WikiProject know which articles are in need of improvement.
- Who can assess articles?
- Anybody. You can even assess your own articles; just try to be objective.
- 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.
- What if I don't agree with a rating?
- You can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it. Alternately, you can ask any member of the project to rate the article again.
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department. Further information can also be found at the WikiProject Council's article assessment FAQ.
Instruction
[edit]An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Korea}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Korea |class= |importance= }}
Quality scale
[edit]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.
|
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. | BTS (as of August 2022) |
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:
|
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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | List of World Heritage Sites in South Korea (as of March 2023) |
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:
|
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. | Sakhalin Koreans (as of June 2008) |
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
|
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. | Kisaeng (as of July 2008) |
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. | Soju (as of July 2008) |
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:
|
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. | Lee Eun-ju (as of June 2008) |
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. | Chollima (website) (as of July 2008) |
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 monarchs of Korea (as of July 2008) |
Importance scale
[edit]Importance | Criteria | Example |
---|---|---|
Top | Subject is a key entry point for Korea and is crucial for understanding Korea. A must-have for any good encyclopedia. | Korean War, Kimchi, Seoul |
High | Subject has a wide range of notability. Includes subjects with a high international profile, primary administrative divisions, keystone articles for major categories. | Ban Ki-moon, Daegu, Gwangju Uprising |
Mid | Subject is notable within its particular field of study or place. Includes higher-profile individuals, most secondary administrative divisions, any category-main articles. | Samgyeopsal, Oh Se-hoon, .kr |
Low | Subject is mainly of specialist interest, perhaps covering a small topic area. Includes lower-profile individuals, most tertiary administrative divisions. | Uiwang Station, OMG (single album), Yangcheon Heo clan |
Requesting an assessment
[edit]If you would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for an article, please feel free to list it below.
Note: This is only to rate the article on quality (class and importance) - you will probably not get feedback on the article.
If you desire comments please use the peer review process.
If you assess an article, please remove it so others will not waste time reviewing the same article(s).
It is also helpful to leave a brief note on article's talk, under a heading "B-class review", stating why the article was failed (or that it was reviewed and passed).
Make sure to check the overview on how to assess a Biography article for details on how to assess. Thanks!
Articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B'; see Wikipedia:Good articles and Wikipedia:Featured articles for higher assessments.
Edit this section and place request here:
Current status
[edit]Transcluded from User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Korea-related:
Korea-related articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
FA | 1 | 9 | 3 | 13 | |||
FL | 1 | 1 | 6 | 26 | 34 | ||
FM | 15 | 15 | |||||
A | 10 | 8 | 18 | ||||
GA | 2 | 20 | 43 | 101 | 166 | ||
B | 32 | 88 | 227 | 414 | 761 | ||
C | 66 | 236 | 722 | 2,739 | 3,763 | ||
Start | 38 | 380 | 1,541 | 12,639 | 1 | 14,599 | |
Stub | 1 | 45 | 846 | 17,868 | 18,760 | ||
List | 8 | 43 | 218 | 2,110 | 1 | 2,380 | |
Category | 12,514 | 12,514 | |||||
File | 482 | 482 | |||||
Redirect | 4 | 17 | 338 | 1,727 | 2,086 | ||
Template | 1 | 1,297 | 1,298 | ||||
NA | 181 | 181 | |||||
Other | 2 | 127 | 129 | ||||
Assessed | 149 | 817 | 3,639 | 36,249 | 16,344 | 1 | 57,199 |
Total | 149 | 817 | 3,639 | 36,249 | 16,344 | 1 | 57,199 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 203,240 | Ω = 5.34 |
Get all at least B-class: 2.5% complete | ||
Get all articles at least C class: 12.4% complete | ||
Get all articles at least Start class: 50.7% complete | ||
Assess all articles: 100% complete | ||
Assessment log
[edit]- The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.
Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.
Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Korea-related articles by quality log