Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/Assessment



This page explains the procedure for assessing the quality of AFI articles. Assessments should be carried out before and after each collaboration, and should not be altered to reflect subsequent changes.

Introduction
The assessment system used by the AFI project to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assess lists and similar non-prose articles. The progression of articles along these scales is described in greater detail below.

Criteria
The following tables summarize the criteria used to assess articles at each level of the above quality assessment scale. In addition to the criteria, the tables list the assessment process used at each level and provide an example of an article previously assessed at that level.

Frequently asked questions: B-Class assessment & criteria

 * General
 * Q. Do I pass a two-line stub for any of the criteria as there is not much to judge?
 * A. Don't bother completing the checklist for something so short that it will be assessed as a stub regardless.


 * B1 – is suitably referenced and cited
 * Q. How much of the article needs to be referenced – what is the policy in this regards?
 * A. Policy is to cite quotations, and anything that is likely to be challenged, but this is B-Class not a FAC so some latitude is permitted. As a rule of thumb, all sections need an absolute minimum of one citation and all direct quotes should be attributed to a source. For the suitability of the sources, see Identifying reliable sources.


 * Q. How many different sources are required for B-Class?
 * A. As many or as few as required in order to cite everything that needs to be referenced (see previous question) - no set number is required.


 * B2 – reasonably covers the topic
 * Q. How comprehensive does the article need to be?
 * A. You are checking that there are no obvious gaps and that the article will reasonably answer any questions a general reader (not a specialist) might have. For example, a B-class article on an air force base would typically say where the base is, when it was in use, and which notable squadrons used it. Similarly, an article about a battle should say where and when, identify the participating units/armies, and mention the outcome.


 * B3 – has a defined structure, including a lead section
 * Q. Organization – What is the minimum to pass the article for organization? If we go by the template comment, as long as it has sections, its ok, irrespective of whether those actually work or if they are not ok.
 * A. Broadly, yes, though if they're ridiculously irrelevant, or very skimpy, consider re-organising the sections yourself on the sofixit principle. B-Class is not a very high bar.
 * Q. How long should the lead section be?
 * A. Providing it accurately summarizes the main body of the article, the length doesn't matter too much. That said, most reviewers expect to see at least one reasonably long paragraph.


 * B4 – is free from major grammatical errors
 * Q. What counts against grammar? – Needs a teeny weeny bit of expansion, since this is, from my experience, one of the harder ones to grade.
 * A. Sure. I wouldn't worry about minor grammatical or spelling errors and so forth. If it makes sense and is reasonably well written, pass it. ("The ship was sunk in 1918 by a torpedo from a German u-boat. Although 20 of her crew were killed, the remainder, including the captain, took to lifeboats and were picked up by HMS Example, which was in the vicinity.") Fail it only if the article is poorly written: "The ship sunk in 1918, by torpedo from a germa uboat. 20 crew went down in it but most with CAPT excvaped in lifeboats and were picked up by example."


 * B5 – contains appropriate supporting graphics, infoboxes, or images
 * Q. If the page has good images, but lacks a much needed infobox, do we pass it or not.
 * A. Pass it. Please note that infoboxes are not compulsory. The fail really only applies if the article has no graphic (infobox, photos, graphics) at all. What we don't want is pages that are a wall of text, with nothing to break it up or add visual interest.


 * Q. Does a longer article require more supporting materials than a shorter one in order to pass Criterion 5? E.g. is one infobox at the top sufficient for a 12-screen-long article, or does it need something to break up the rest of the text as well?
 * A. Just an infobox is not sufficient for a longer article. The rest of the text should be broken up a bit as well.

How to assess (template instructions)

 * Further instructions: Template:Former AFI

On the article's talk page, add the Former AFI banner, if not present. Provide before and after assessments using the B-Class criteria checklists, and oldclass and newclass (if needed). This will produce something like:

Here's a blank version of the template that can be copied onto a talk page:

B-Class checklists
The B-class criteria checklists will aid you in assessing the article, before and after the collaboration. In the example code above,  can be changed to   or   for each of the criteria, to indicate whether the pre- and post-improvement versions of the article meet the criteria.

If the checklists are filled out, the template will automatically assign the classes B and C when the relevant criteria are met. Otherwise, use oldclass and newclass to set the before and after classes. To switch the automatic assessments onto the list-scale classes BL and CL, specify list and/or list.