Wikipedia:WikiProject Lithuania/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the Lithuania WikiProject!

The goal of this department is to accurately rate the quality and relative importance of Lithuania-related articles on Wikipedia. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work. The ratings are modeled after the WP:1.0 program guidelines and are expected to play a role in it.

The assessment is done by entering relevant parameters in the WikiProject Lithuania, the project banner; this causes the articles to be automatically placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Lithuania articles by quality and Category:Lithuania articles by importance.

FAQ

 * 1. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? : Just add WikiProject Lithuania to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else. However, we would certainly appreciate if you could rate the article according to the guidelines below and leave a short summary of your rationale on the talk page.
 * 2. What is the purpose of the article ratings? : The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles we are interested in and helps to prioritize work. Please note, however, that these ratings are meant for the internal use of the project, and do not imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
 * 3. How can I get an article rated? : Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
 * 4. Who can assess articles? : Any Wikipedian, who has familiarized himself/herself with the guidelines below, is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
 * 5. 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.
 * 6. 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 raise your objectins on the article talk page.
 * 7. Aren't the ratings subjective? : Yes, they are subjective, especially concerning importance. However, it's the best system we've been able to devise. And it works pretty well for many different WikiProjects. If you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!
 * 8. What if I have a question not listed here? : Ask questions on the talk page.

Importance scale
We recognize that importance is a relative term. An article judged to be "Top-importance" in one context may be only "Mid-importance" in another. Any importance ratings applied by this project, only reflect the perceived importance to this project. The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather it should serve as a guideline for project participants to determine which article should receive more attention.

Requests for 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.

I feel it could be upgraded to high importance and at least B class article. We are awaiting photos from the church archives at the moment.
 * Saint George Roman Catholic Lithuanian Church updated - photos to be added soon - expanding "red" links to "blue" ones (adding link pages


 * Would like to have the Talk: Konstantinas Sirvydas moved to Low-importance status. Dr. Dan 05:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Dan, it's not talk rated, It's notability of Konstantinas Sirvydas article.--Lokyz 15:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe that's what he meant. :-) I think it deserves to stay at its current classification, though. -- tiny plastic Grey Knight   ⊖  16:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Užupis is currently classified as Stub-class, but I think it's improved since its last rating. I did the last rewrite, so feel free to gab at me if you have complaints! :-) -- tiny plastic Grey Knight   ⊖  13:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe Telšiai deserves to be Top importance. But I cant figure out why Telšiai County is so notable (Top importance) to compare with, for example, Vilnius county or other topics? Yes, the article is almost empty, but it is not the reason for top importance. Orionus 08:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * There are tons of inconsistencies in tagging the importance (because no one bothered to develop a clear guideline or structure). Be bold, and thanks for cathing it! Renata 12:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Would like Kurier Wileński moved to High importance status. Klon-immortal 00:00, 25 July 2007 (GMT +2)
 * Klaipeda Airport has been created to eliminate ensuing confusion brought by IATA that assigns Palanga International Airport as Klaipeda's own. Plead to upgrade to mid-importance Ttk371
 * Drąsius Kedys should be moved upward in the scale. Additional input to the article needed as well.
 * Request for assessment: Kyviškės Airfield is listed as "Start class", but it seems to meet all the criteria for Content assessment/B-Class criteria. The importance is currently listed as Low, but "Mid" would be more appropriate. It is the main airport near Vilnius when it comes to trainings, events, movie sets and leisure flights. It is also more notable than Klaipėda Airfield, which has "mid-importance" rating. Frequently.by.train (talk) 16:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Request for assessment – Kyviškės Airfield

 * ,, , : Could you please help me decide on Quality_scale and Importance_scale of Kyviškės Airfield? If this question is in any way inappropriate – please let me know. And I am sorry if that is the case. I selected your nicknames randomly from WikiProject Lithuania
 * As for importance, should it be mid or high? It seems that high would be most appropriate. Less prominent and less important Lithuanian airfields are often ranked mid, for example Klaipėda Airfield, Kazlų Rūda Air Base, Jonava Air Base and others. High feels approapriate looking to what is ranked high, for example Palūšė, Vilnius Book Fair, Stelmužė Oak and others.
 * As for quality, I think it clears the bar for B. Would you agree? It clears the official criteria for B – Content assessment/B-Class criteria. Furthermore, the article is comparable to other articles ranked B, for example Battle of Kokenhausen, Eliezer Silver and others. Also, there are other airport articles of similar or lower quality which are ranked B, for example Huntsville Regional Airport, Dickson Field, Djilma Airfield, Mandal Airfield and others.
 * Would it clear the bar for Good article? There are airport related articles of similar quality which are rated "good article" for example Trondheim Airport Station, Rørvik Airport and others. It feels like a 50/50 case for me. If it is enough for “good article”, then it is great. Great because it could serve as a template for other small airfields in Lithuania, Baltics and beyond. If it is not enough, what should be improved?
 * Signed Frequently.by.train (talk) 18:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Considering that the airfield has way more notability and importance than the Lithuanian airports you linked to and which are considered mid-importance, I would be all for classifying this as a high-importance article.
 * Regarding the class criteria, it definitely passes B-Class. Personally, I think that the article deserves just slightly more work for it to be a Good article, because it now has many facts about why the airport is important, but it feels like it should have larger paragraphs. For example, for cinema, I would name more series and such, while for the war and independence section, I would add more information like the names of the Soviet air force units. Please note, these are just ideas and I myself will not classify the article as good because I don't think it fair for me to able to label articles good or not when I have not created an article that has been labelled a Good article.
 * Anyways, you should put the article forward for consideration as a good article in a more general wikiproject like WikiProject Aviation, because people there will most likely now what constitutes a good article about an airport. Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you !
 * Is it ok for me to change to high and B?
 * Talk:Kyviškės_airfield
 * It feels that someone else should do it, given that I wrote most of that particular article. Signed Frequently.by.train (talk) 18:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll do it for you then. Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * @Frequently.by.train If you want to nominate the article for Good article, I recommend you start by reading and doing the Good article nominations/Instructions. Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Speaking as someone who does a lot of assessing: importance scale is generally not important, as in - almost nobody pays attention to this. Not to say you cannot seriously consider it, it is just a discussion about how important is an article is something I see maybe once every 5 years if not 10... Now, quality assessment is more relevant (folks care about it more). But frankly, stub to B is a rule-of-thumb done by individuals who care. A few project have B-class review systems but most are not active enough for it to work, I think milhist and biography are notable exceptions (I tried to make it work for Poland and gave up, nobody but me assessed stuff). So from where I stand, anyone can change the importance as they wish, and quality, up to a B, sure. That said, the article looks rather short for me, and I'd assess it as C myself unless I was sure it is reasonably comprehensive. See also WP:ASSESS guidelines. B-class articles should be "mostly complete". Is that article mostly complete? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:23, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for such a thorough response.
 * I think it's complete, it covers a variety of topics and there is hardly any more information on a tiny airfield without commercial flights. Frequently.by.train (talk) 18:00, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for participating in WikiProject Lithuania. The article of Kyviškės airfield is quite good and well-referenced (being a suitable combination of this, I think it already passes B-class criteria). Nevertheless, I have doubts if article about Kyviškės airfield is high-importance because per article content it is a "small regional airfield", "As of 2023, this airfield is primarily used for events and trainings, no domestic or international commercial routes operate here", therefore I highly doubt that it is as important as the Vilnius Airport (the main airport of Lithuania's capital Vilnius; also rated as high-importance article). Given quite important moments in Kyviškės airfield's history, I think it would be better to qualify it as a mid-importance article. -- Po  fk  a  (talk) 20:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comment, much appreciated. I agree, it is definitely much less important than Vilnius Airport. Frequently.by.train (talk) 18:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)