Wikipedia:WikiProject Cryptozoology/Assessment

{| style="width:100%" width=100% {| style="background:#EEFFEE; width:100%;" width=100% valign=top
 * style="vertical-align:top;width:77%; background:#EEFFEE; border:1px solid #949393; font-size:95%; padding:8px; text-align:left" |

Welcome to the assessment department of the Cryptozoology WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about cryptozoology and cryptids. 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 Cryptozoology project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Cryptids articles by quality and Category:Cryptids articles by importance, 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 Cryptids 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 Cryptids project banner on its talk page:

The following values may be used for the class parameter:


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

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

Importance scale
The following values may be used for the class parameter:


 * Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Cryptids articles)
 * High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Cryptids articles)
 * Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Cryptids articles)
 * Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Cryptids articles)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Cryptids articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below. 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 cryptids.

''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 any specific 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 Cryptids/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.

Karl Shuker
Significant updates to this article have been made since the initial assessment at stub-class, including an expansion of the subject's career, approach, publications, and critical reception of his work. Nmillerche (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Rod (cryptozoology)
There is a good explanation of rods as an optical illusion, and there are references. Gary (talk) 23:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Waitoreke
Has been greatly expanded and images have been added. Zalgt 14:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Morgawr (cryptid)
This article now has extra material and a picture since it was last rated. Any chance of an upgrade to "start"? Totnesmartin 16:41, 28 April 2007 (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.


 * }