Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Yu-Gi-Oh!/Assessment

Article assessment for WikiProject Yu-Gi-Oh!.

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

Frequently asked questions

 * How do I add an article to the WikiProject? : Just add to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
 * Someone put a template on an article, but it's not an Yu-Gi-Oh!-related topic. What should I do? : Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
 * What is the purpose of the article ratings? : The objective of the rating system is twofold. First, it allows the project to monitor the quality of the articles within our scope and to prioritize work on these articles. Second, the ratings will be used by the Wikipedia 1.0 project to compile a "released version" of Wikipedia that can be distributed to readers. Please note, however, that these ratings are meant for the internal use of the project, and do not imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
 * Who can assess articles? : Any member of the Yu-Gi-Oh! WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes. Editors should also note that assessments of B or A require project consensus, while GA, FA, and FL assessments have associated formal review processes that must be followed.
 * How do I rate an article? : Check the assessment scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article, then follow the instructions below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
 * How can I make a request for someone from the project to assess an article? : Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
 * Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? : Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
 * Where can I get more details or feedback about an article? : The peer review process is one that results in a more thorough examination of articles; to ensure project members also view the article, make sure to list it at our peer review page.
 * 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 (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!
 * What about lists? : Lists of episodes, characters, and chapters are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status. Lists which are pure lists of links, however, should be assessed as list class, as they have no real content to be evaluated.

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

Assessment scale
The scale for assessments is defined at Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.

These criteria apply to general-content articles. The manual of style provides additional guidelines about what sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.

Each anime- and manga-related article has its assessment included within the Yu-Gi-Oh! template, such as. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Anime and manga articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.

B-Class criteria
In addition to the above, B-Class articles for the WikiProject should meet the following six criteria:

Priority scale
Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If priority values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the article falls under. 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).

Assessment guidelines
The following are guidelines for series articles.
 * Stub class — Little structure, severely lacking content. The article may include flaws such as embedded lists without descriptions or lack an infobox.
 * Start class — Some structure, basic overview of the topic present.
 * C class — Decent structure, lacking some information (typically out of universe info).
 * B class — Coherent structure, proper lead, fair amount of information for each section.
 * GA class — Covers everything well; must be nominated at WP:GAN and passed by an impartial reviewer in order to qualify. Before nominating, the page should include inline sourcing for controversial statements, contain critical reception information, and have no image copyright issues.
 * A class — Very comprehensive, sections have multiple sub-sections, as needed, that are complete. The article complies with both project-specific and general style guidelines, such as the use of web and book citation templates, non-breaking spacing between numbers and their units, and en dashes (–) as required per WP:DASH. All dead links should have been properly repaired.
 * FA class — Passes WP:FAC.

Note that lists are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status.

Current A-Class candidates
<!--
 * Requesting a review


 * To request an A-Class review of an article:
 * 1) Add  to the WikiProject Anime and manga project banner at the top of the article's talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax).
 * 2) From there, click on the "currently undergoing" link that appears in the template. This will open a page to discuss the status of the article.
 * 3) Place  at the top.
 * 4) Below it, write your reason for nominating the article and sign by using four tildes.
 * 5) Add  at the top of the list of A-Class review requests below.


 * If an article is nominated a second (or third, and so forth) time, either because it failed a prior nomination, or because it may no longer meet the standards and may thus need to be demoted:


 * 1) Move (do not copy) the existing review subpage to an archive.
 * 2) Follow the instructions for making a request above (editing, which will be a redirect to the archive, into a new nomination page).
 * 3) Be sure to provide a prominent link to the last archive at the top of the nomination statement (e.g. "Prior nomination here.").

There is no limit on how quickly renominations of failed articles may be made; it is perfectly acceptable to renominate as soon as the outstanding objections from the previous nomination have been satisfied.


 * Commenting

Reviewers should keep the criteria for featured articles in mind when supporting or opposing a nomination. However, please note that (unlike actual featured articles) A-Class articles are not expected to fully meet all of the criteria; an objection should indicate a substantive problem with the article.


 * Closing and archiving

Reviews will be closed by one of the project coordinators, normally after four days have elapsed. However, any project coordinator may extend the four-day review period by up to three days if (a) the article has no opposes but insufficient support for promotion or if (b) the article's nominator requests, prior to the review's closure, more time to resolve matters arising. An article will generally be promoted to A-Class if (a) it has garnered at least two endorsements from uninvolved editors, and (b) there are no substantive objections indicative of a major flaw in the article.


 * To extend the review period, coordinators should add, directly above the nomination text, as appropriate:
 * 1) either :
 * or :
 * To close a review, coordinators should:

--> None
 * 1) Add  and   to the top and bottom of the review subpage, respectively.
 * 2) Move the  from the list of requests below to the current archive page.
 * 3) Remove  in the WikiProject Anime and manga project banner at the top of the article's talk page.
 * 4) Add  in the WikiProject Anime and manga project banner at the top of the article's talk page.
 * 5) Update the article's history as follow: