Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian football/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the Canadian football WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Canadian football 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.

Category:Canadian football articles by quality serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the WPCFL project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the WPCFL template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Canadian football articles by quality.

Frequently asked questions

 * How can I get an article rated? : Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
 * Who can assess articles? : Any member of the Canadian football WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. The only exceptions are the FA-, FL-, and GA-class articles which have their own formal review areas and A-class articles which require a review on the article's talk 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, 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 WikiProject Canadian football discussion page.

Instructions on how to assess a Canadian football article
An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the WPCFL project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Canadian football articles. Select an article from the list. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the WPCFL template. Finally, add in the proper parameters to the talk page template, as outlined below. For example, to assess an article as Start class, the project banner should be edited to appear as:.

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 list it below. Note: This is only to rate the article on quality - you may or may not get feedback on the article. If you desire a review, use the Peer review process. If you assess an article, please remove it so that other editors will not waste time reviewing the same articles. Thanks!

Articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B'; see Good articles and Featured articles for higher assessments.

Edit this section and place request here:


 * 1) Willie Fleming - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Doug Flutie - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) High school football - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) History of American football positions - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Pop Ivy - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 6) Cal Jones - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 7) Joe Kapp - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 8) Warren Moon - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 9) Steve Owen (American football) - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) Jackie Parker - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 11) Matt Sheridan - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 12) Roy Shivers - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 13) John Tory - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 14) J. C. Watts - This article was formerly rated B-class but needs a WP:BCLASS checklist completed.  Double Blue  (talk) 02:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 15) Tyler Palko - needs B-class assessment.-- Giants  27  ( Contribs  |  WP:CFL ) 02:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

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 popularnotability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of baseball. Importance does not equate to quality; a featured article could rate 'mid' on importance.

One way to think of importance is this: imagine a person with absolutely no knowledge of Canadian football who is researching the topic on Wikipedia. Importance can be defined by how greatly the absence of an article on a particular subject would be felt and/or how quickly that article's absence would be noted.

WikiProject importance assessments
See the table on the right for a summary of manual assessment levels. Keep in mind that the importance assessment of an article bears no relation to the quality of that article, nor is it a reflection on the amount of work editors have put into that article. It's simply a measure of the relative importance of that article within the sphere of the Canadian football project.

Importance must be regarded as a relative term within this project. Assessments should only reflect the perceived importance to the Canadian football project. An article judged to be "Top-importance" in one WikiProject's context may be only "Low-importance" for another WikiProject. For example, a player may have a productive National Football League career where he leads the league in a certain statistical category, makes a Pro Bowl and is named an All-Pro, but only a short, non-distinguished Canadian football career. (Example: Ricky Williams) The article covering this player could be regarded as "Mid-importance" to the NFL project but as "Low-importance" to the Canadian football project.

Consider a hierarchy such as Canadian football (Top) -> CFL Draft (High) -> 2011 CFL Draft (Mid). As one can see the centrality to the overall scope of Canadian football of the topic being covered by each article in this hierarchy decreases. Another example of a hierarchy one could consider: Canadian Football League (Top) -> 2005 CFL season (High) -> 2005 Edmonton Eskimos season (Mid).

Ranking within this project will be helpful in determining which articles should be the focus of editing efforts put forth by the project participants. Additionally, ranking could be helpful in deciding which articles are included first as the scope of the Wikipedia 1.0 project expands. An article labeled as "Top-Importance" for the subject of Canadian football would almost certainly warrant inclusion in all general print encyclopedia releases.