User:Livinlife133/Article assessment

After the failed WikiProject for the Blackstone Valley by yours truly, I needed a way to motivate myself into improving articles. I didn't have the project, which had set criteria for assessment ranks. After attempts to adopt a modified version of WP:1.0, the project collapsed due to pressure to delete the project. That assessment scale was similar to the standard WP 1.0 criteria, with some minor tweaks to make it suitable for smaller projects.

I have chosen to adopt the scale for my personal use (and other Wikipedians can use it as well). As a newbie, I am unsure if I can create a template to put on articles or not. (If someone has an answer, let me know.)


 * Stub: "Stub" articles are articles that provide a short introductory paragraph, and maybe an infobox.
 * Start: "Start" articles are articles that show that some research has been done on the topic. A full section separate from the introduction has been completed.
 * C: "C" articles have multiple sections completed, and are properly cited and formatted. A few images have also been added, to any given section. Unnecessary details have been removed.
 * B: "B" articles have provided minor details about the article's topic. Images for each section have been added and properly included into the article, and are not thrown into a "gallery" section. Sections are of a proper length for the topic addressed in the article.
 * GA: "GA" (good article) articles are B articles improved, with citation and related tags resolved. An assessment of "B" is required for recognition.
 * A: "A" articles are very well done, and well structured. Infoboxes have been completed and appropriate lists have been well organized. Sub-sections have been included at a proper length and have been integrated nicely with the rest of the article.
 * FA: "FA" (featured article) articles are A articles improved, with improved grammar and uniform citation styles. An assessment of "A" is required for recognition.