Wikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft Windows/Assessment

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

''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.


 * Windows wait cursor - Article needs to be assessed. --Proud User (talk) 17:43, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Microsoft Office Mobile - Article has never been assessed before. Brianreading (talk) 21:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC))
 * VBScript - Requesting assessment to upgrade quality rating; signficant changes to article since last quality assessment - Thanks. DonToto (talk) 00:26, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * File Allocation Table - updated, still B-class, but IMO high importance. –89.204.137.133 (talk) 22:30, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Enhanced Write Filter - Why is this only rated as "Stub Class"? It's a lot more than a "dictionary definition". How about "Start" or "C". It's a bit poor on reliable references (it's largely based on a single non-Microsoft web page) and as soon as you try to do anything you find it lacks important details --Salocin-yel (talk) 10:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Logs

 * 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.