Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora/Assessment

< Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora

In order to better focus our efforts towards improving and maintaining Wikipedia articles related to persons of the African diaspora, WikiProject African diaspora is participating in article assessment. These article ratings not only identify topics in need of further work, but they also help us recognize excellent contributions. Parameters in the {{WikiProject African diaspora}} project banner define the rating of the article and place it in the appropriate sub-category of Category:African diaspora articles by quality and Category:African diaspora articles by importance.

How to assess

edit

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject African diaspora}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.

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 African diaspora articles)   FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class African diaspora articles)   A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class African diaspora articles)   GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class African diaspora articles) B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class African diaspora articles) C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class African diaspora articles) Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class African diaspora articles) Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class African diaspora articles)   FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class African diaspora 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 African diaspora articles) Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class African diaspora articles) Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class African diaspora articles) Draft
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class African diaspora articles) File
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class African diaspora articles) Portal
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class African diaspora articles) Project
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class African diaspora articles) Redirect
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class African diaspora articles) Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class African diaspora articles) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed African diaspora articles) ???

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

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

Statistics

edit
African diaspora articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
  FA 10 8 16 16 5 55
  FL 2 3 1 6
  A 2 2
  GA 29 24 52 97 35 237
B 134 141 189 502 268 1,234
C 208 205 452 2,151 2 1,283 4,301
Start 266 169 498 4,307 14 3,150 8,404
Stub 28 74 95 1,417 5 1,640 3,259
List 2 8 31 125 2 132 300
Category 3,716 3,716
Disambig 1 12 13
File 93 93
Project 14 14
Redirect 1 8 8 47 251 315
Template 135 135
NA 1 3 1 5
Other 74 74
Assessed 678 638 1,343 8,671 4,319 6,514 22,163
Unassessed 1 6 7
Total 678 638 1,343 8,672 4,319 6,520 22,170
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 82,974 Ω = 4.74


Quality scale

edit

WikiProject African diaspora uses the same criteria for grading articles as set out by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. If you are not sure what class an article falls under, leave a note on the WikiProject's talkpage, and someone will help you out.

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

Importance scale

edit

African diaspora articles are rated on this importance scale. Importance must be regarded as a relative term. If importance values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority 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).

WikiProject article importance
Importance Criteria Example
 Top Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field. African diaspora
 High Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Back-to-Africa movement
 Mid Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. Afrocentrism
 Low Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. Alpha Kappa Alpha
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_African_diaspora/Assessment&oldid=1001556035"