Wikipedia:WikiProject Archaeology/Assessment

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

This is a bot generated table of the assessment process of WikiProject Archaeology supported articles. It is updated automatically every 2-3 days.

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 Archaeology 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.

Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the WikiProject Archaeology project banner on its talk page:

The following values may be used for the class parameter:


 * FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Archaeology articles)
 * A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Archaeology articles)
 * GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Archaeology articles)
 * B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Archaeology articles)
 * Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Archaeology articles)
 * Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Archaeology articles)
 * NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article Archaeology pages)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Archaeology articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:


 * Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Archaeology articles)
 * High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Archaeology articles)
 * Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Archaeology articles)
 * Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Archaeology articles)
 * Unknown - any article which isn't designated by importance is automatically added to the Category:Unknown-importance Archaeology articles.

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Requesting an assessment
If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for it, please feel free to edit this page and list it below.

NOTE: NO ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE HERE SINCE 2010
 * 1) Series of articles on Hadrian's Wall Milecastles Milecastle 0 to Milecastle 13 (so far). Sammy_r (talk) 05:21, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Vinča-Belo Brdo — Joseph Roe Tk •  Cb, 09:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Henge Aarghdvaark (talk) 09:54, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) Southeastern Ceremonial Complex Assessed as C while working on WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America backlog; but it's probably at least a B, with potential to become a GA. Djembayz (talk) 00:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * 5) Nordic Stone Age No references for nearly 4 years; eligible for sweeping text deletion. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:51, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * 6) Wade's Causeway been working on this for about 2 weeks, taking it from a basic stub article, want to get it ready for GA/FA eventually but it needs a preliminary rating from the project -PocklingtonDan (talk) 20:41, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There is now a peer review page for this at [[Wikipedia:Peer_review/Wade%27s_Causeway/archive1]] - PocklingtonDan (talk) 09:51, 16 November 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) Romano-Celtic Temple - I've made this and been adding to it over this month. I'd appreciate a review to see if we are at 'Start' or 'C' class yet. Work in progress. Zakhx150 (talk) 10:35, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) Tel Kabri - new addition to the project. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie &#124; Say Shalom! 1 Tevet 5774 20:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) Balangoda_Man - This is rated 'Top-importance' on Wikiproject Sri Lanka but only 'Low-importance' on Wikiproject Archeology. After having made substantial changes to this article to take it up to GA-class, the existing peer-reviewed literature on the subject seems to indicate that the topic (surrounding the earliest prehistoric homo sapiens in Sri Lanka, and South Asia in general) is of much higher importance to Archeology in general. Therefore I would greatly appreciate it if someone could take a second look. Many thanks. Ldesilva (talk) 04:58, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 4) List of Scheduled Monuments in Bath and North East Somerset currently at FLC any help or advice appreciated.&mdash; Rod talk 18:03, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 * 5) Xerxes Canal Review for B or C class would be great! Cotopaxi5897 (talk) 09:47, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 6) Thessaloniki Metro (Archaeology section). Would appreciate a review for classification. Thanks! --Michail (blah) 16:44, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * 7) Bodzia Cemetery Would appreciate a review for classification, thank you! Alixthö (talk) 05:10, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * 8) Magnet fishing Requesting a complete review on this article, not even sure if it really pertains to archeology as most people seem to do this trying to find treasures in rivers and other bodies of water, not necessarily for documentation, research, or an archeological purpose. The scale lists it as High importance and even if it was to stay within the project I would significantly dissent on it being High, based on your scales this does not compare to other High importance articles. Cheers OfficerManatee (talk) 07:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 9) Cueva de las Manos Lots of content has been added. Requesting review for reclassification. Tyrone Madera (talk) 04:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 10) Subneolithic - Been developing the article (and will continue to do so) over the past couple weeks, would appreciate a review regarding its quality scale. Thanks in advance! OK872 (talk) 01:34, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 11) Prehistoric Archaeology Requesting that this stub be reviewed to see if the classification can be upgraded to article or if further revisions need to be made. Thank you in advance! Neeks 3 (talk) 05:44, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 12) Lawrence H. Keeley — Requesting that this currently start-class article be reviewed for a higher quality classification and receive an importance class as well. Nmarshall25 (talk) 15:58, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 13) Hilly Flanks — Requesting that this currently stub-class article be reviewed if possible, would appreciate some input and feedback. Redherring22 (talk) 17:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I've changed the rating to C and made some comments on the talk page. Great work so far pulling it up from a Stub! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:42, 3 January 2023 (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.