Wikipedia:WikiProject Games/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Games. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to all games. The article ratings are 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 Games project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Games articles by quality and Category:Games articles by importance.

FAQ

 * See also the general assessment FAQ.


 * 1. What is the purpose of the article ratings? : The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content.  Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
 * 2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? : Just add WikiProject Games to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
 * 3. Someone put a WikiProject Games template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. 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).
 * 4. Who can assess articles? : Any member of WikiProject Games 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.
 * 5. How do I rate an article? : Check the quality 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 that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
 * 6. Can I request that someone else rate an article? : Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
 * 7. Where can I get more comments about an article? : The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
 * 8. 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.  Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
 * 9. Aren't the ratings subjective? : Yes, they are somewhat subjective, 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!
 * 10. What if I have a question not listed here? : If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.
 * Our A-class rating is awarded with the informal agreement that two editors agree with the rating of A-class.
 * Comments and suggestions are usually placed as a list on the talk page of the article, not here.
 * We have some specific standards based upon the article advice page, see the table below.

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 popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of Australia.

''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 a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.''

Assessment Tools
The process of going through unassessed articles can become mundane quickly. To speed up the process you can use the Kingbotk plugin for the AutoWikiBrowser if you are running Windows 2K/XP. This tool requires admin approval (generally, only users with over 500 edits in the mainspace are accepted) before a user can make edits with the tool. After approval, the Kingbotk plugin can be setup to make assessments with the tag. For futher details on installation and setup visit the pages for AutoWikiBrowser, Kingbotk plugin, and Generic WikiProject templates.

Another tool that helps with assessing articles is Metadatatest.js, which does not require any external software.

fr:Projet:Jeu vidéo/Évaluation ru:Википедия:Проект:Игры/Оценки