Wikipedia:WikiProject Literature/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Literature. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to literature, including his works and derivative works. The article ratings are used within the project itself to aid in recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the WPLIT project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Literature articles by quality and Category:Literature articles by importance.

Frequently asked questions

 * How can I get my article rated? : Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
 * Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments? : Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
 * 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.
 * Who can assess articles? : Any member of the Literature WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
 * Where can I find articles to assess? : Many articles in Category:Literature need to be assessed and any articles in Category:Unassessed Literature articles and Category:Unknown-importance Literature articles.

If you have any other questions that aren't listed here, feel free to ask them at the talk page.

How to assess articles
You can assess articles by placing the WPLIT banner on its talk page (not the article page!) and using the two parameters, class (to assess the quality) and importance (to assess the priority).

Priority assessment
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the WPLIT project banner on its talk page:



The following values may be used for importance assessments:
 * Top - adds articles to Category:Top-importance Literature articles
 * High - adds articles to Category:High-importance Literature articles
 * Mid - adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Literature articles
 * Low - adds articles to Category:Low-importance Literature articles
 * Unknown - Any article not rated for importance is automatically added to the Category:Unknown-importance Literature articles.

Requesting an assessment
If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion or a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below.

Requested assessments


 * 1) Literary fragment Hello. I have been expanding this stub and am looking for someone to assess it. I appreciate your time. Thank you!Alsonamedbort15 (talk) 05:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Gothic double. Currently classified as a stub, I have expanded this article by 2600 words and added lots of credible references for a university assignment. I'm looking for someone to assess the article and hopefully move it to a higher classification. Thank you so much! Snowdrop Fairy (talk) 08:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Escapist fiction. Currently rated stub, I've recently edited and expanded this article for a university assignment. Looking for someone to assess and edit this article! Thank you for your time.BeePatella (talk) 12:40, 28 May 2021 (UTC)


 * 1) Vignette (literature). Currently rated stub. I've recently edited and expanded this article for a university assignment. I would be very grateful if someone could assess this article. Thank you! --Penceypug (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 2) An Address, to the Hon. Edmund Burke from the Swinish Multitude. - hako9 (talk) 08:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * 3) Shanghai (novel). ZarhanFastfire (talk) 09:16, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * 4) The Junction Chronicles. Currently rated Start. Having read the descriptions of Start, C, and B, I can't understand how Start applies to this article. But I normally work with film-related articles.ZarhanFastfire (talk) 17:46, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * 5) Abkhaz literature . Rated start. Has info and 2 sources, but no citations.Yobmod (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) Fan fiction Rated B. Lots of info, sourced, well presented and wikified.Yobmod (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 7) Homosexuality in speculative fiction
 * 8) Samuel Johnson, Christopher Smart and their works Ottava Rima (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC) Rated a long time ago for other projects, for literature I'd put Johnson as Top and Smart as low'. Ktlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 9) Storytelling--I've rated as start, though I have trimmed the article of essay-like writing. I am more interested in an importance rating. --Call me Bubba (talk) 17:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) Hamamatsu Chūnagon Monogatari DoneKtlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) León de Greiff. Not yet rated. mijotoba (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Low for his obscurity outside country of origin (though he looks quite interesting to me!) Ktlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 12) The London Jilt. Please assess. Drmies (talk) 01:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC) C class for good sources and inline citations. Mid importance for an interesting, studied topic that is not that widely known. Ktlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) Featured article candidates/Harold Pinter/archive1 Needs prose review, spotchecks on sourcing and close paraphrasing checks. Jezhotwells (talk) 05:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 14) Collaborative_fiction has no rating AdamCaputo (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Has been rated/assessed.  INeverCry   19:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 15) Shooting an Elephant has had some (significant) additions.--Skittles the hog (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I rated it C-class. I feel it has gaps that prevent it from reaching B class (most notably the lack of information about its reception).  Greengreengreen  red  03:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 16) Khwaja Muhammad Latif Ansari
 * 17) John Banville has significant recent additions and has not been re-assessed for quality for four years.  — O'Dea  (talk) 05:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC) I re-rated this article c-class. This still needs a bit of work to get it to b-class; there are several citation-needed tags.  INeverCry   17:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 18) English literature The current rating of "Start-class" seems somewhat unjust. Can it be updated? Rwood128 (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC) It has now been bumped up to C Class. That seems about right. --Ktlynch (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * 19) Women and children first - I'm just wondering if, as the phrase (and article topic) in question first appeared in a novel, would the article qualify for wikiproject literature? (Low importance, I'd imagine, but still...)-- Ty  rS  16:19, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Reassessed as c, adding project, Sadads (talk) 16:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

(talk) 11:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) John Cowper Powys - This article has not been assessed. Rwood128 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC) ✅
 * 2) James Hanley (novelist) -- Not assessed ✅
 * 3) Khwaja Muhammad Latif Ansari✅
 * 4) Daniel Silva (novelist)-- Jim in Georgia  Contribs  Talk  18:32, 31 October 2015 (UTC) ✅
 * 5) Parnassus plays ✅
 * 6) Franz Kurowski
 * Reassessed as B, substantially research, is thorough, probably needs peer review or GA review, for substantial feedback, Sadads (talk) 14:20, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Renée Vivien Prize (new article currently unassessed), Trauenbaum (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 2) Hawthorne and His Mosses, an important essay the writing of Moby-Dick was interrupted for. No quality reassessment request, but the Priority ranking Low done on May 31 needs reconsideration. For reasons, see the article's Talk Page.MackyBeth (talk) 18:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * 3) The Philosophy of Composition by Poe does not have a banner at all yet, hence no assessment whatsoever.MackyBeth
 * 4) The Bridge on the Drina: rated Start Class, but upon recent expansion appears worthy of B. 23 editor (talk) 19:21, 14 August 2016 (UTC)