Wikipedia:WikiProject New Hampshire/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the New Hampshire WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's New Hampshire related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the WP:1.0 program.

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the WikiProject United States project banner; when the NH parameter to this template is also set to yes, setting the other parameters will cause the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:New Hampshire articles by quality.

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 United States to the talk page with the NH parameter set to yes.
 * 3. Someone set the NH parameter to yes in a WikiProject United States template on an article's talk page, but the article 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 the New Hampshire WikiProject 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.  At least the following Wikipedians already semi-regularly assess articles for the New Hampshire WikiProject:
 * Cooljeanius (talk) (contribs) 01:48, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Feel free to sign and add yourself here!
 * Feel free to sign and add yourself here!


 * 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. 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.
 * 8. 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!
 * 9. 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, leave a message on the talk page.
 * 10. What happened to the old Project New Hampshire template? : It got deprecated and subsumed into the one we now mention throughout this page.

Assessment instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the WikiProject United States project banner on its talk page that has its NH parameter set to yes (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):



Article quality

 * FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * should only be used for articles that are currently listed as featured articles


 * A (adds articles to Category:A-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * should only be used for articles that have A-Class status


 * GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * should only be used for articles that are currently listed as good articles


 * B (adds articles to Category:B-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * C (adds articles to Category:C-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class New Hampshire articles)

List quality

 * FL (adds lists to Category:FL-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * should only be used for lists that are currently listed as featured lists


 * List (adds lists to Category:List-Class New Hampshire articles)

Other pseudo-quality options

 * Category (adds categories to Category:List-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Disambig (adds disambiguation pages to Category:Disambig-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * File (adds files to Category:File-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Portal (adds portals to Category:Portal-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Project (adds project pages to Category:Project-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Redirect (adds redirects to Category:Redirect-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * Template (adds templates to Category:Template-Class New Hampshire articles)
 * NA (for things that fit into none of the previous categories, and where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article New Hampshire pages)

Article Priority

 * Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance New Hampshire articles)
 * High (adds articles to Category:High-importance New Hampshire articles)
 * Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance New Hampshire articles)
 * Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance New Hampshire articles)
 * None (adds articles to Category:Unknown-importance New Hampshire articles)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed New Hampshire articles.

Priority 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 only of interest primarily to a certain demographic.

''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 wider audience—but which are of high notability for this project—should still be highly rated.''

Also note that now that WikiProject New Hampshire is a sub-project of WikiProject United States, we have separate importance fields for the two. Thus, an article may have different values in its importance and NH-importance fields in its WikiProject United States template, if it is more important for New Hampshire than it is for the rest of the United States, or vice versa.

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 in the "Pending" subsection below. Once you have assessed an article from the list of pending requests, please move it to the list of fulfilled requests. If you would like an article from the "Fulfilled" subsection to be re-assessed, feel free to move it back to the "Pending" subsection with a comment explaining what you think has changed since the previous request.

Fulfilled requests

 * 1) Tuckerman Ravine
 * 2) Hills Memorial Library Seeking B-class assessment.  I think it may qualify; it's short but relatively comprehensive for what it is. --Jayron32| talk | contribs  02:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Max I. Silber RobHoitt 03:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) Amanda Merrill new article. --Epeefleche (talk) 13:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 5) Geoffrey Holt (philanthropist) Thanks - Yamfri /ˈjæm.friː/ (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Pending requests

 * 1) Add new requests here

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.