Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Virginia/Assessment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
MainMembersAssessmentImprovementPeer ReviewRequestsTemplatesResources

Welcome to the assessment department of the Virginia WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Virginia or the people of Virginia. 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 Virginia}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Virginia articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

÷÷÷==

How can I get my article rated?
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of the Virginia WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
How can I assess articles?
Please see the instructions section below.
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.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are, 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!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

Assessment list

[edit]

This list is generated automatically every night around 10 PM EST. View full worklist.

Virginia articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA Other ??? Total
FA 3 5 10 23 41
FL 3 3
FM 35 35
A 1 1
GA 4 19 53 140 216
B 25 135 238 447 12 857
C 17 228 515 1,496 147 2,403
Start 1 121 1,246 4,681 505 6,554
Stub 13 674 8,314 1 341 9,343
List 2 19 64 333 14 432
Category 4,231 2 4,233
Disambig 36 36
File 85 85
Portal 2 2
Project 28 28
Redirect 1 1 8 357 465 832
Template 425 425
NA 10 4 14
Other 28 28
Assessed 53 541 2,809 15,804 5,339 3 1,019 25,568
Unassessed 81 81
Total 53 541 2,809 15,804 5,339 3 1,100 25,649
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 101,444 Ω = 5.23

Instructions

[edit]

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Virginia}} project banner on its talk page: 

{{WikiProject Virginia
|class  =
|importance =
|attention =
|collaboration-candidate =
|past-collaboration =
|peer-review =
|old-peer-review =
|needs-infobox=
}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Virginia articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Quality scale

[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. 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:
  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 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:
  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. 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
  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. 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

Priority scale

[edit]

The priority within Virginia articles is based on this scale. It does not reflect on the inherent importance of the topic or the value of contributions to the articles. Rather, it is a tool for the prioritization of the thousands of articles within the project, which an editor or the group of editors may decide to use when choosing what to work on. The following values may be used for Priority assessments:

Rating General properties Examples
Top The article is about one of the core topics of Virginia. (This article is of the utmost importance to the project, as it forms the basis of all information.)
High The article is about the most well-known or culturally or historically significant aspects of Virginia. (This article is fairly important to the project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.)
  • Geography:
  • Virginia Indian tribes (e.g. Nansemond)
  • Major agencies of the Commonwealth (e.g. Virginia State Police)
  • Landmarks and sites:
    • Landmarks used as symbols of Virginia (e.g. Monticello)
    • Most National Parks, National Monuments, etc. in Virginia
    • Colleges and universities in Virginia
    • Roads of national-level interest (e.g. Blue Ridge Parkway, U.S. Route 58)
  • History and events:
  • People:
    • US Presidents from Virginia not ranked higher (e.g. John Tyler)
    • Founding fathers from Virginia not ranked higher (defined here as those who signed the Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, or U.S. Bill of Rights, Generals in the Revolutionary War, or represented Virginia at the conventions for the above, or otherwise made substantial contribution to the American Revolution and founding of the U.S. government) (e.g. George Mason)
    • Governors of Virginia (either of the Commonwealth or the Colony)
    • Other people of enduring high importance and legacy to Virginia
Mid This article is relatively important to the project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas. (The article is about a topic within the field that may or may not be commonly known outside Virginia.)
  • Geography:
    • Towns and most census-designated places
    • Some unincorporated communities. Factors may include historical prominence, whether there are streets and a distinct commercial district.
    • Secondary rivers, major wind gaps, some individual mountains, etc. (e.g. Pamunkey River)
    • Former counties
  • Landmarks, institutions, and sites of statewide significance:
  • Smaller or specialized state government departments, boards, and agencies
  • Daily newspapers (in current publication)
  • Education-related articles of interest primarily to Virginians (at a state or regional level)
    • City/county school systems
    • Community colleges
    • Graduate-level institutions (with or without an attached university)
    • Articles on collegiate athletics/sports for the entire school (not individual teams) and noted sports rivalries
  • Biographies of people who are/were:
    • Virginians who won major national or international awards (such as a Pulitzer Prize, Academy Award, etc.)(e.g. Warren Beatty)
    • Virginia athletes inducted into their sports' national halls of fame (e.g. Eppa Rixey)
    • U.S. Senators for Virginia
    • Current U.S. Representatives for Virginia
    • Select former U.S. Representatives for Virginia (factors may include number of terms, major leadership positions, notable acts, etc.)
    • Acting, provisional, or otherwise brief governors of Virginia
    • Select Virginia state politicians (factors may include time in public office, holding positions such as Speakers of the House of Delegates; Lt. Governor, Attorney General, etc.)
    • Federal Circuit Judges
    • Other Virginians of enduring statewide significance or national prominence not ranked higher (e.g. Hunter McGuire,Walter Reed)
Low The article is about a topic that is highly specialized within Virginia studies and is not generally common knowledge outside that community or Virginia. (This article is of little overall priority to this project, but it covers a highly local, specific or specialized area of knowledge.)
  • Local-level geographic forms, such as smaller tributaries and creeks
  • Most unincorporated communities
  • Landmarks, institutions, and sites of local and regional significance:
    • Most Virginia Landmarks Register or National Register of Historic Places sites
    • Most local bridges, railroad stations, secondary roads, local trails
    • Most neighborhoods and urban districts
    • Most high schools and other secondary schools, etc. (some that are regional or especially historic may rank higher)
    • Hospitals
    • Most radio and television stations
    • General aviation airports and fields (not serviced by commercial airlines)
    • Most local parks and wildlife management areas
    • Individual attractions at amusement parks
    • Other places of largely local or highly specialized significance
  • History and events of local or brief significance:
    • Military skirmishes of minor strategic significance
    • Instances of recurring events (Sports seasons, elections, etc.)
  • Most biographies (Default), including:
    • Most mayors, members of the Virginia General Assembly, local politicians, etc.
    • Many U.S. Representatives (unless especially notable), esp. those who served only partial terms
    • Many notable members of the Virginia Sports Hall of Fame (who are not ranked higher)
    • Notable Federal District Judges, etc.
    • Absentee royal governors
    • NOTE: Biographies may be outside the project scope for people who spent relatively little time in Virginia or are at best tangentially or fleetingly relevant to it, such as those whose sole connection is from attending a university, on a military deployment or stationed in Virginia, or similar situation (unless of course their notability derives from their time in Virginia). Please tag these for more relevant WikiProjects.
  • Individual college teams and professional sports teams of local interest
NA This page does not need priority assessment
  • non-articles (e.g. templates, categories, project pages)
??? This article is of unknown priority to this project. It remains to be assessed. There should be none of these; please help assess the article.

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, keeping the newest on top.

Prince George County Public Schools

[edit]

I have made improvements to the article including some more information about the district, some statistics, more information and i would like it to be evaluated again please and i would like if you can leave some feedback on the pages talk page please best regards, Paytonisboss (talk) 13:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prince George County Public Schools

[edit]

Hello I've made this article and it's about a Virginia School district and I would like yo have some feedback on it please

Writing articles about a school district can be tough, as it's hard to find info about the district itself rather than individual schools. Thank you Paytonisboss for starting this article. I will take a look.--Mojo Hand (talk) 23:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

John Lynch (1740–1820)

[edit]

I have added a significant amount of information and sources since I began editing this article some time ago, including information regarding his life, death, and abolitionism. I'd like some feedback - don't expect much past maybe start level for the page, rather than a stub.

I agree that it's a start class article now.--Mojo Hand (talk) 14:21, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manassas station

[edit]

On September 11, I have heavily edited the Manassas Station page. I have added more citations (previous version only used four original sources), added more historical, cultural information and have added station information such as services and round trips. I would like some feedback. (Arhan2212 (talk) 7:23, 11 September 2024 (UCT)

Central Business District

[edit]

I have added information on the district as well as a map and photo. Included is the elevation, time zones, area code, relation to the federal reserve, a photo of the district, and a boundary map of the district. Ktkvtsh (talk) 08:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hollin Hills

[edit]

In the past few weeks, I and others have made extensive edits to the breadth in quality of the content and details used to describe this mid-century modern historic district. Because I have been the major editor of these revisions, I am seeking an objective view to categorize this article above Start class. Thanks djharrity (talk 20:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's at least a B. Next step is to submit for WP:GAN--Mojo Hand (talk) 18:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch Gap Canal

[edit]

I have just completed an intensive edit of Dutch Gap article. I tried to keep all the information in the original, but have added detail, references, more photographs, and an appropriate map. As I worked on it, it seems its Civil War significance became the biggest focus. I think it is now beyond start class. Would somebody be willing to evaluate it? Thank you!Wtfiv (talk) 22:05, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Better late than never, but I have re-assessed it as B class and mid priority. Nice article. --Mojo Hand (talk) 16:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Harrison family of Virginia

[edit]

The article should be considered for upgrades for both quality and importance. The article has just been promoted to GA; it was last assessed as a B and since then it has also undergone more expansion. A quality reassessment is deemed appropriate in conjunction with the GA. Also, review of the criteria for importance indicates an upgrade to “High” importance is justified, as the article features three presidents, two governors, and a founder. Thank you. Hoppyh (talk) 18:05, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Mathews (Augusta County)

[edit]

I have recently done a major update to references for accuracy and would like to request a look over. Thank you.Newtack101 (talk) 18:48, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Point, Virginia

[edit]

Article has been reworked to emphasize archaeological significance of an early colonial settlement in the area. Could someone review this to see if it qualifies higher than stub class? I'm hoping that with the quality of citations it may reach C. Thanks. Wtfiv (talk) 02:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work done on the archaeology. I see it as a strong C at this point.--Mojo Hand (talk) 22:05, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shirlington, Arlington, Virginia

[edit]

This article was rated as a Stub class many years ago, but considering it is a topic of low importance, it is largely complete. With a fair number of in-line citations, it is roughly a C in my estimation. Since I have edited it in the past, I would like someone else to give it a rating. Thanks. —  AjaxSmack  15:12, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@AjaxSmack: I rated it a C on April 23. There's a lot of work here, and it is no longer a stub, that's for sure!

Jamestown supply missions

[edit]

Currently rated as Start, but given the major overhaul and broadening of the article, I am fairly sure that it now qualifies as higher than that. Thanks. JabberJawJAPAN talk 00:42, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jabberjawjapan: I put this article at B level. I think there is a lot of comprehensive material here. Though more can be added due to the complexity of the missions, I think that for many users it will answer their questions.Wtfiv (talk) 19:01, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey M. Lacker

[edit]

Currently has low importance rating which should probably be raised. Jeffrey M. Lacker will be retiring president (in October 2017) of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 16:12, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia's congressional districts

[edit]

Although given a start-class assessment prior to my recent edits, the article already had substantially more information on Virginia's Congressional Districts than other states articles in that "(state) congressional districts" series. I reorganized the subsections and expanded several sections and added multiple reform efforts in the last decade, other editors have made recent contributions to ensure that the current Congressional District information is updated. I'm not sure why the four-year old snidely deprecating post remains unarchived. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:23, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Williamsburg Area Transit Authority

[edit]

This article was rated as a Start class many years ago, but since then has has substantial improvements in wording and inclusion of sourced information. I would raise it to at least C class but would like someone else to give it a rating. Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Edits) 23:43, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; looks like C class to me.--Mojo Hand (talk) 14:47, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia Conventions

[edit]

Article with start assessment is now expanded from mid-1700s Conventions alone to include all Virginia Conventions and Constitutional Commission activity in the 20th century, with three editors recently making contributions. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:27, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After review of B class criteria, I have upgraded the article to B class. Advancing to A class requires two other editors to concur with the advancement, with no major disagreements. I propose an A-class assessment. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 11:38, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated this article for a Good Article assessment. It has been peer reviewed line by line. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 19:02, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting of John Geer

[edit]

Article on 2013 incident in Springfield, Virginia needs assessment.--TommyBoy (talk) 11:27, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessed as C class; the article covers all the key points quite well and is solidly referenced.--Mojo Hand (talk) 18:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Harold A. Schaitberger

[edit]

Newly-created article on current International Association of Fire Fighters General President who began his professional career in Fairfax County, Virginia needs assessment.--TommyBoy (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Done--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fairmount Park Civic League

[edit]

Article on Norfolk, Virginia-based civic organization needs assessment, but I'm not sure how to assess it because the article has multiple maintenance tags. --TommyBoy (talk) 15:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a mess, and I toyed with invoking WP:TNT. However, there does seem to be something notable here, so I think I may roll up my sleeves and try to clean it up.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:23, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Update - I redirected this to Fairmount Park Neighborhood. The civic league article was massively promotional, and can be fully covered in the article about the neighborhood.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

University of Virginia Greek life

[edit]

A new article on Greek life at UVa that needs to be assessed. Puppysnot (talk) 22:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly at least a B; good luck at GAR.--Mojo Hand (talk) 01:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ruffner Hall

[edit]

Article on the most notable non-athletic building on Longwood University's campus. Historically notable due to the 2001 fire and its place in the development of LU. Tried to make it Start-class and Low importance, but should be assessed. Puritan Nerd 04:20, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I totally agree with that assessment. The article is on the way to being C class; I think it just needs some more history and an architecture section.--Mojo Hand (talk) 18:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyn Tavenner

[edit]

Article on current Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Services Administrator and Richmond native is currently assessed as Stub, and might warrant re-assessment.--TommyBoy (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I reassessed as start class. Thanks! --Mojo Hand (talk) 15:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Center for Climate and Energy Solutions

[edit]

Article on Arlington, Virginia-based organization needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 09:36, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - assessed as start. --Mojo Hand (talk) 04:34, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Libby Hill, Richmond

[edit]

New user created new article on the Libby Hill neighborhood in the East End of Richmond that needs assessment. Thanks in advance. RVA all day (talk) 06:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well referenced, good prose and lots of images. A solid article - I assessed it as C class.--Mojo Hand (talk) 03:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation

[edit]

Article on Alexandria, Virginia-based organization needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 21:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I assessed as C class; nice article.--Mojo Hand (talk) 13:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History of Virginia on stamps

[edit]

Reflecting Virginia's history and landmarks as commemorated on stamps, a topical philately article with 84 stamps and commentary. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:29, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the article is actively being worked. I suggest waiting for the dust to settle before doing an assessment.--Mojo Hand (talk) 23:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Work continues to be done, but the article has clearly reached at least B class, which is a high as it can go short of WP:GAC--Mojo Hand (talk) 13:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Langley_High_School_(Fairfax_County,_Virginia)

[edit]

Article about Langley High School in McLean, VA, which is classified as stub class, however it has much more information than the Herndon High School article, [[1]], which is classified higher.

I reassessed it as a start. Thanks.--Mojo Hand (talk) 17:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WABN

[edit]

Article about Abingdon, Virginia area radio station WABN. I have made considerable sourced additions to the article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like C class to me - the sourcing is excellent.--Mojo Hand (talk) 02:32, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Sir. Much appreciated. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WINC (AM)

[edit]

Article about Winchester, Virginia area radio station WINC. I have made considerable sourced additions to the article on the way to one day GA (and maybe FA)...hopefully. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:50, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely at least a B; a nice article.--Mojo Hand (talk) 04:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Sir. Much appreciated. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Schmidt

[edit]

Article on Google executive who grew up in Virginia needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 06:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a solid B to me. Cheers.--Mojo Hand (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of Richmond, Virginia history

[edit]

Article needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 06:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I assessed as list class, which appears to be the normal convention for these types of articles.--Mojo Hand (talk) 01:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MeadWestvaco

[edit]

Article on Richmond, Virginia-based packing company needs assessment. --TommyBoy (talk) 06:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, article has been assessed as Start-class by another user. --TommyBoy (talk) 01:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orange County, Virginia

[edit]

Requesting assessment of article. --PlannerGuy (talk) 12:11, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very solid. I reassessed it as B class, which is as high as it can go short of WP:GAN.--Mojo Hand (talk) 03:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.


January 2, 2025

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

January 1, 2025

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]
  • Boat People SOS (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Colin Garrett (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Conway R. Sands (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Eugene Withers (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Gival Press (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Harry L. Snead (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Henry Seawell (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Herman Hollerith IV (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • James P. Ownby (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Laura Fornash (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Maggie L. Walker (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
  • Mark Byington (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Maurice Jones (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Richard L. Morrill (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Richard Lucian Page (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Scott Ralls (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • State Theatre (Falls Church, Virginia) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Sweet Frog (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Teresa M. Chafin (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
  • Thomas Ashley Graves Jr. (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Thomas Harker (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • William Thornton (Virginia burgess) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed

[edit]

December 31, 2024

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

December 30, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]
  • Ethel Kennedy (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
  • Harrison Phoebus (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed

[edit]

December 29, 2024

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

Worklist

[edit]
The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.
This page was once used by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is preserved because of the information in its edit history. This page should not be edited or deleted. Wikiproject article lists can be generated using the WP 1.0 web tool.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Virginia/Assessment&oldid=1256968631"