Wikipedia:WikiProject Assyria/Assessment

Article rating and assessment scheme
An article rating and assessment scheme has been implemented for Assyria-related articles, which is monitored and maintained by WikiProject Assyria. In this scheme, all Assyrian-related articles ('article' here also includes lists) may be assigned a particular rating which indicates an assessment of their class (overall quality).

The primary purpose of this rating and assessment scheme is to provide editors with a sub-categorised survey of the current status of Assyrian related articles, which can then be used to prioritise the overall workload and highlight articles needing improvements at various stages.

For example, lower-quality articles in need of most work can be readily identified for attention and collaboration.

There will be a number of secondary benefits from the scheme, such as being able to track which kinds and topics of articles are 'neglected'.

This assessment and rating scheme follows the precepts adopted by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, see Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment and Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Work via Wikiprojects for details.

The class ratings are recorded by setting appropriate values to the parameters of the main WPAP Project banner, WPAP which are placed on the corresponding talk pages of articles about Assyrians.

See the Quality scale for guideline criteria for rating an article by class/quality.

The assessments of class are assigned manually by WikiProject Assyria project members (or other interested parties)– see the Rating instructions for details. Assigning a rating will automatically place the article in an appropriate rating category.

Once assigned, behind the scenes a bot runs periodically (scheduled daily, about 0300hrs UTC) which compiles a variety of statistics and log data, which can then later be analysed.

It is expected that this rating and assessment scheme will require periodic and iterative maintenance, as new articles are created or identified, and existing articles are progressively improved (or, hopefully much rarer, demoted), requiring the status to be reassessed (indicated by changing the parameter value).

Of course, anyone is free to edit any of the articles they choose, however it is hoped that this will provide some basis for a more methodical approach to the longer-term overall improvement of content and coverage in Assyrian related pages.

Instructions
An article's assessment is recorded via the use of certain parameters of the WPAP project banner, which is affixed to the talk pages of in-scope articles.

The main parameter used for this exercise is class (indicates an assessment of the article's current overall quality). At least for the present, we making only minimal use of the importance parameter: see Importance scale'''.

Usage summary (note the parameters are in lowercase). :

These parameters flag the article according to the values chosen (which then appear on the project banner), and also assign the article to a corresponding category. The possible values of these parameters and guidance criteria on which value to choose are detailed below: see Quality scale for the class parameter.

The general workflow is as follows:
 * 1) Locate an in-scope Assyrian related article (or list), add the WPAP project banner to its talk page if not already there. (Note this also applies to new articles you may create, ie you can add the banner and the rating as you go).
 * 2) If currently unassessed (or when adding the project banner anew), determine what its class assessment rating should be, using your judgement and the criteria given here. Try to be as frank as possible in the assessment, the aim here is to appropriately identify articles needing later improvement and there's nothing to be gained by "over-ranking" them.
 * 3) Add the selected parameter values to the project banner template call, per the specified syntax. Once previewed/saved, you should see the values updated in the banner and the appropriate categories assigned.
 * 4) If in doubt as to the appropriate class level, you can either leave the value unassigned for now (ie omit the parameters), and/or consult with another project member to decide.
 * 5) If the article already has a rating, but you disagree or the article has subsequently been edited by you or someone else so that its overall quality has changed (hopefully for the better!), then you can update the parameter yourself to reflect its new status.
 * 6) On an ongoing basis, you can patrol the various x-class categories for improvement opportunities, and also the unassessed cats for new assessments.

Quality scale
Each article may also be assigned to a particular class, intended as a point-in-time assessment of its overall "quality" - relative to the criteria given in the quality scale which is detailed below.

This quality scale follows the definitions employed at the Version 1.0 Editorial Team's assessment system.

The following values may be used for the class parameter (they should be entered exactly as given):

Importance scale
Each article may also be assigned to a particular importance. At least for the present, we making only minimal use of this.


 * Top: major, broad articles like Assyrian people or Assyrian empire
 * High: All actual ethnic groups and similar entities and articles on the history of any ethnic group within a particular country or region
 * Mid: Other articles that are likely to be of general interest (for example, an article about the theatrical traditions of a particular ethnic group)
 * Low: Articles that are not about individual ethnic groups and are not likely to be of general interest (for example, a building that houses an ethnic organization)

I'm not as sure what would go in "Mid" vs. "Low"; it is a matter of what would have broad interest.

Detailed criteria by class
These are the detailed criteria per class/quality division, following the assessment scheme used by the Wikipedia V1.0 Editorial team.