Wikipedia:WikiProject Iraq/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the Iraq WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Iraq or the people of Iraq. 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 Iraq project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Iraq articles by quality and Category:Iraq 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 Iraq 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.

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 Iraq.

''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.''

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.
 * Humam Tariq -- I would really appreciate it if this article could be assessed. Hashima20 (talk) 21:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Abu Hanifa Mosque -- Significant changes were done to the article. It was rebuilt completely, so I hope it gets reassessed fairly. Hashima20 (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Al-Shaab Stadium is a newly recreated article. It was significantly fixed and lots of photos, videos and references were added to it. I would appreciate it if somebody reviewed it because it hasn't got a quality scale nor an importance scale. Hashima20 (talk) 21:37, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Mar Dinkha IV I have made several changes that warrant this article graduating from start class. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Could you take a look at Enûma Eliš, it is listed as B-Class but appears to fail most the B-Class criteria. -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 20:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The article on Hammurabi is included in the Iraq project, and I have just completed an article on his son and successor Samsu-iluna. I would like to request that this be considered for inclusion in the Iraq section and that it be assessed for quality and importance. My apologies if I am putting this request in the wrong section, Wikipedia's social structure can be a bit labyrinthine. Zoweee (talk) 23:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I have done some updates on Anbar offensive (2015) and I would like to have a quality and importance assessment.Cotopaxi5897 (talk) 09:36, 14 May 2015 (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.