Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture/Assessment

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

Frequently asked questions

 * 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 Agriculture WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
 * 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.

Quality scale
This WikiProject uses the Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment standard quality scale.

Importance scale
The criteria used for rating article importance 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). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Agriculture.

''Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.''

We are currently discussing which articles should be counted as being of Top-importance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture/Assessment/Top-importance articles.

Requesting an assessment
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.


 * Rice production in Bangladesh. After making substantial revisions to this article, I believe this warrants a fresh rating by an independent eye. Bolideleoi (talk) 18:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Beekeeping in Ireland -- Bibby (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2020 (UTC) Over the past year plus there has been many improvements and sources added to this wiki page and I feel that a rating of C-Class for Quality Scale for the WikiProject Ireland and WikiProject Agriculture is too low? Or what do you think can be done to improve it? Feedback very appreciated.
 * Altai Mountain goat -- HuskyEdits (talk) 13:18, 28 March 2018 (UTC) This article went from one sentence to a mostly complete entry. I think that it should receive a higher quality rating (Start).
 * Artificial photosynthesis -- EditSafe (talk) 16:01, 5 March 2017 (UTC) I think that this article should receive an importance rating (low or mid), and should also receive a higher quality rating (B or C).
 * American Pekin Duck -- EditSafe (talk) 15:51, 5 March 2017 (UTC) I think that this article is more important than 'low'. I think that the importance is 'mid', because of the popularity of the American Pekin Duck itself, and how much people research about it. I have also seen the Wikipedia article mentioned before on other websites.
 * Corporate farming -- Creigpat (talk) 03:08, 7 November 2014 (UTC) I made some big edits to this page that I believe improved its quality beyond the start class.  I'm still not certain on the ranking system, so I figured I would get someone else's opinion on the page.
 * Still has too few sources. TheMagikCow (talk) 09:32, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Ancon_(sheep) -- Jaydubya93 (talk) 02:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC) I would like to request an upgrade from Stub class to Start or C class. While I would be the first one to point out that a fair amount of additional work is needed, I have doubled the size of the article and increased the references from one to six citations (all from academic journals). Due to the extinct status of this animal, images are proving difficult and may not be possible in the short term. That said, additional expansion is under way and an extra page or so of solid, relevant content should be no problem.
 * ✅ Upgraded to Start TheMagikCow (talk) 17:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * International Food Policy Research Institute -- ND Eowyn (talk) 06:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC) This has been improved and may qualify for a different quality ranking.
 * International Livestock Research Institute -- ND Purplecherry (talk) 14:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC) This article may qualify for a different quality ranking.
 * Otto Frederick Hunziker. On 7 Jul 08, Tpbradbury upgraded the quality scale rating to B-Class, consistent with other WikiProjects. The article has since been listed as a good article under the good article criteria. On 11 Sep 08, the article was upgraded from B to GA quality status for all applicable WikiProjects.  I would be interested in any further assessment to A Class or comments regarding possible changes to further progress.  More importantly, I would be very interested in a reassessment of the importance rating for this project. The importance rating has remained stuck at low.  I am not sure if this is the default setting and the article is awaiting a manual review.  Or are  dairy issues deemed of low importance generally in the overall agriculture scheme?  Given the significant overall impact of  O F Hunziker on large segments of the agricultural community, the article appears to warrant a medium - if not high - importance rating.  A reassessment and any assessment comments would be greatly appreciated.--Rpclod (talk) 03:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Looks like this went to GA-class on September 11, 2008.  Blind  Eagle  talk ~ contribs  19:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Polypay -- Performed an overhaul of the article by taking out some cases of lifting from other cites, improved references, added pictures, extra information and links Pschloss (talk) 21:08, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Zebra chip -- this potato disease article is new and unassessed; it may be featured within the next 48 hours on the main page in DYK?.  CB ( ö)  04:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅  Blind Eagle  talk ~ contribs  19:13, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Mechanical pest control -- Should be B-class now.--Deathlaser (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Limousin (cattle)-- Should be more than start class Finnegas (talk) 20:04, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ GAN TheMagikCow (talk) 09:28, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Assessment log

 * 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.

Worklist

 * The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.