Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject London/Assessment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Statistics

[edit]
London-related articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 4 15 52 139 210
FL 2 4 28 34
A 1 1
GA 5 35 104 471 615
B 20 79 214 946 29 1,288
C 15 93 417 3,233 81 3,839
Start 4 69 590 12,871 209 13,743
Stub 76 8,588 39 120 8,823
List 3 21 94 554 15 687
Category 4,912 4,912
Disambig 57 57
File 519 519
Portal 25 25
Project 63 63
Redirect 22 419 702 1,143
Template 404 404
NA 5 9 14
Other 61 61
Assessed 51 314 1,574 27,254 6,791 454 36,438
Unassessed 1 102 474 577
Total 51 315 1,574 27,356 6,791 928 37,015
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 141,866 Ω = 4.98


Quality scale

[edit]

Grading scheme

[edit]
WikiProject content 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.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. 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;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. 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
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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. Marshalsea
(as of March 2015)
 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:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. 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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. List of winners of the London Marathon
(as of March 2015)
 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. Class Not Used
 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:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. 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);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. 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. Harmondsworth Great Barn
(as of March 2015)
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
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. 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.
  6. 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. London Heathrow Airport
(as of March 2015)
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. 13 Kensington Palace Gardens
(as of March 2015)
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. 102.2 Smooth FM
(as of March 2015)
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. .london
(as of March 2015)
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 architectural sculpture in the City of Westminster
(as of March 2015)

Each London related article should have an assessment of quality and importance on its talk page using the {{WikiProject London}} template, such as {{Wikipedia:WikiProject London|class=B|importance=high}}.

Quality scale

[edit]

The following quality classes are used to categorise articles on Wikiproject London:

  • Stub class: No structure, only brief sentence or two - Use class=Stub
  • Start class: Some structure, brief paragraphs - Use class=Start
  • C class: improved structure and details separating article into topics but requiring, further development such as references, images, etc. - Use class=C
  • B class: developed structure, at least one paragraph for most required headers, in-line sourcing, includes map and at least one image - Use class=B
  • Good Article (GA) class: all required headers with complete coverage of subject and relevant images. Must have been nominated for and have passed a Good Article review - Use class=GA
  • List: an article that takes the form of a list rather than prose. An introduction is still required and images may be included - Use class=List
  • A class: NOT USED
  • Featured Article (FA) class: complete, professional standard article, which must have been nominated for and have passed a Featured Article Review - Use class=FA
  • Featured List(FL) class: complete list, which must have been nominated for and have passed a Featured List Review - Use class=FL

Other administrative classes for use on non-article pages include:

  • Portal class: for the Wikiproject London portal and its sub-pages - Use class=Portal
  • Project class: for the project page and sub-pages - Use class=Project
  • Category class: for categories - Use class=category
  • Template class: for templates - Use class=template
  • Redirect class: for redirect pages = Use class=redirect
  • Book class: for books = Use class=book

Importance scale

[edit]
Importance Criteria Examples
Top Buildings, locations and events that are synonymous or iconic of London.
London Plan international centres		 City of London
City of Westminster
The Great Fire of London
West End of London
Buckingham Palace
Tower Bridge
Clock Tower, Palace of Westminster
High Key articles about important buildings, districts or topics.
All the other London boroughs and all major railway stations.
London Plan metropolitan centres.		 East End of London
Liverpool Street station
London Borough of Camden
London Borough of Islington
Croydon
Westminster
Southwark
Mid Less well known buildings, places and organisations that are significant.
London Plan major centres and any other district on {{London Districts}}
Significant railway stations outside the central area		 Metropolitan Board of Works
Inner London
Outer London
Brixton
Clapham Junction railway station
West London
Isle of Dogs
Low All other less important buildings, places and stations etc. Abbey Wood railway station
Little Ilford
London Buses route 10
County Borough of West Ham
Aldwych Theatre
IG postcode area
Highams Park
History of local government in London
Unknown not rated - please start rating

Log

[edit]

November 25, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

November 24, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

November 23, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]
  • History of Arsenal F.C. (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from List-Class to Redirect-Class. (rev · t)
  • James Olive (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from B-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
  • Liam O'Donnell (musician) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to Redirect-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Lioness line (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
  • Mildmay line (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
  • RAF Hospital Uxbridge (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
  • Robert Park (priest) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
  • Suffragette line (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
  • Weaver line (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
  • Windrush line (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Unknown-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

November 22, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

November 21, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

November 20, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

November 19, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_London/Assessment&oldid=1128991514"