Wikipedia:WikiProject Oregon/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment page of the WikiProject Oregon, which focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Oregon-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 programme.

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the WikiProject Oregon project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Oregon articles by quality and Category:Oregon articles by importance, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.



FAQ

 * See also the general assessment 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 Oregon to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.


 * 3. Someone put a WikiProject Oregon template on an article, but it 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 WikiProject Oregon 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.


 * 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.


 * 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. 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.


 * 8. Where can I get more comments about an article?
 * People at Peer Review can conduct a more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there, or ask for comments on the main project discussion page.


 * 9. 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.


 * 10. 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!


 * 11. 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, you can go to the main project discussion page.

Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the WikiProject Oregon project banner on its talk page (see the template page for more details on the exact syntax):



The following values for the class parameter may be used:

These classes no longer need to be explicitly specified to the template. They are deduced by the namespace of the page the template is placed upon.
 * FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Oregon articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as featured articles)
 * FL (adds articles to Category:FL-Class Oregon articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as featured lists)
 * A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Oregon articles; should only be used for articles that have made considerable progress upon the GA version, an article that is undergoing FA review would be A-class)
 * GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Oregon articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as good articles)
 * B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Oregon articles)
 * C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Oregon articles)
 * Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Oregon articles)
 * Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Oregon articles)
 * List (for articles which consist primarily of a list; adds pages to Category:List-Class Oregon articles)
 * Dab (adds pages which are disambiguation pages to Category:Disambig-Class Oregon articles)
 * Portal (pages in Category:Portal-Class Oregon articles)
 * Category (categories in Category:Category-Class Oregon articles)
 * Image or File (media in Category:File-Class Oregon articles)

The following values for the importance parameter may be used:
 * Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Oregon articles)
 * High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Oregon articles)
 * Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Oregon articles)
 * Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Oregon articles)
 * NA (for none articles, do not need importance rating for non-articles)

Articles for which a class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Oregon articles and articles for which an importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Oregon articles. The class and importance should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

If one of the values are mistyped or otherwise invalid, bright red text is displayed on the page and placed in category:Oregon articles needing attention.

Quality scale
The quality "class" an article receives should follow Wikipedia's regular guidelines for quality found below.
 * Articles which have not been formally evaluated, or which have failed a good article review, should not be assigned a quality rating higher than B class. Above that an article needs to go through a formal review process.


 * See Good article candidates
 * See Featured article review
 * See Category:Wikipedia editorial validation

Notes on importance to WikiProject Oregon
This is only for assessment of articles that fall within the Oregon WikiProject.

For determining the Importance rating (Low, Mid, High, Top) please keep the following in mind:
 * Keep a historical perspective.
 * Keep a geographical perspective.
 * Every item in the Project is already important and notable, otherwise it would not be on Wikipedia.


 * Approximate breakdown of the percentage of articles in each category as a goal.
 * Low=80%
 * Mid=15%
 * High=5%
 * Top=1%


 * Actual breakdown excluding n/a items:

Rules as bullet lists
In late October 2015, converted the below rules into the table below. I'm not sure which form is better.


 * Governors should automatically be in the High category. If they also served in the federal government as a top official (i.e. Hatfield, Goldschmidt) or some other major accomplishments/contributions (McCall) then they should move up to Top, and also up to Top if they did something else special.
 * U.S. Congress people (or other federal positions such as judge or head of a department) should be in the Mid category, unless they served in a leadership role (minority/majority leader, committee chair, etc.), then up to High; U.S. Senators also to High, and if served in a leadership position or other notable position, to Top.
 * State-level politicians (supreme court judges, members of the house/senate, mayors, secretary of state, etc.) should remain in the Low category unless they served in multiple places (Paulus in both legislature and sec. of state), or had a leadership role in their branch (Chief Justice, Speaker of the House, etc.) then up to Mid. If they did more, then they probably served in Congress or as governor and would fall under those guidelines. If they served in a leadership role, and won another statewide position, and had some other major accomplishment then High.
 * Local politicians: Should remain Low; mayors of cities with 100,000+ in population are Mid.
 * Pioneers should remain in the Low category unless they have a major statewide historical significance or received national attention (Meek, the Whitmans), then to Mid. If they helped to found a town still in existence and served in the state government (Lovejoy) then also to Mid. If more, then to High (Young as the impetus for the prov government, and Top if more significant (John McLoughlin who is designated as the Father of Oregon by the state).
 * Athletes also should remain as Low, unless they are a member of the Oregon Sports Hall of Fame or an Olympic medalist, then to Mid. If they are also a member of a national sports hall of fame and spent most of their career in Oregon then High. If they won a major award (MVP, Heisman Trophy), also High. Someone like Steve Prefontaine who attained national prominence and has an event named after him would justify a Top.
 * Artists/entertainers: Top 10 song on some recognized chart, a nomination to a major award (Oscar, GRAMMY, Golden Globe, MTV, Tony, etc.) are Mid; major award winner to High; number 1 single or multiple major award winner or induction into a hall of fame gets you to Top.
 * Writers: Winners of major awards (Pulitzer, Caldicott, and other national awards) bump to High. Statewide award winners get you Mid.
 * Other people: Local significance only then Low. Statewide impact then Mid. National prominence then High. All of these and long-term impact then Top. If a person is notable across multiple areas, multiple criteria can be used to move them into a higher rating. For example, if Clyde Drexler was elected as governor, he would be bumped to Top.


 * Base level is Low. Any structure (needs to have been built) over 250 ft to Mid. Ten tallest structures are High, and tallest is Top.
 * National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) default is Low. If a National Historic Landmark, then Mid. Any other fame of note bumps up a level for either.
 * Bridges: All bridges over 1000 ft in total length or they carry an Interstate, they are Mid; if both, to High. Longest bridge is Top, as is any Interstate bridge over 1000 feet on the NRHP.
 * Shopping centers/malls: over 1000000 ft2 of retail space to Mid.


 * Non-incorporated communities should go into the Low. Incorporated cites/towns are Mid; CDPs with 10,000+ are Mid; county seats and any city with 50,000+ people are High; five most populous cities and state capitol are Top.
 * Physical geography articles should go into the Low category unless they cover multiple counties, then Mid (Northern Oregon Coast Range). If they affect a large number of counties, then High (Willamette River, Eastern Oregon). If they tend to be what people know about the state and affect many counties then Top (Oregon Coast, Cascade Mountains).
 * National wildlife refuges or other national protected areas are Mid (except wilderness areas as they are usually contained within another protected area), national monuments are High, and national parks are Top.


 * Roads: If a road is only in one county, or just barely in a second county, then Low; all interstate spurs (405/205) and all US signed routes (US 20) to High; top 10 busiest roads/freeways are High; mainline interstates are Top.


 * Articles on companies/organizations/governmental bodies should go into the Low category, unless they have an impact beyond the local level then Mid. Five largest employers (except government) are Top.
 * Businesses based in Oregon: companies with annual revenues of $100 million+ or listed on a major stock exchange (NASDAQ/NYSE) to Mid; Fortune 1000 companies or those with annual revenues of $1 billion+ to High (Lithia Motors); Fortune 500 companies into Top (Nike).


 * Organizations such as museums or libraries would move to Mid if they have a regional impact (Oregon Historical Society), and High if they are of a national stature (OMSI).
 * Government institutions with large operations throughout the state would be Mid (Oregon State Police), while the heads of the three branches of government would be High (Governor of Oregon).
 * School districts: those with more than 5,000 students are Mid, those with 10,000 and up are High, and the largest to Top.


 * Colleges and universities: Base level is Low.
 * Four year schools: All four-year colleges are Mid; all professional schools that have split-off articles (pharm, med, dental, law, business, journalism, etc.) are Mid; all four-year colleges with 2,500 students or more are High, with the three largest and oldest as Top.
 * Community colleges and any other two-year schools: Those with enrollments over 5,000 are Mid, those with over 10,000 are High.


 * Event articles should go into the Low category unless it had a long-term impact over a significant region (as in more than just one county) or a statewide impact over a short period, then Mid (Columbus Day Storm of 1962). If it had statewide and long term impact then High (Oregon Bottle Bill). If it has a statewide, long-term impact and receives national attention then Top (Oregon Constitutional Convention).


 * For everything else, the default should be Low. Then if there is some sort of significant reason to move it up to Mid do so if the item had more than just a local (city, county) plus a lasting effect of more than a year or so. If the effects are larger or longer term then High. If it helps to define what Oregon is to people, then Top.

Rules presented as a table
Anything that meets WP:Notability and is related to Oregon merits at least a Low rating. These tables give criteria for Mid, High and Top ratings.

Statistics
From Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Oregon articles by quality statistics

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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use Peer review instead.


 * China Ditch - opinion on B-class
 * Bill Hansell - Request reassessment; originally Start-class; now expanded 5x so it should be B or C level

A Class assessment
If you feel that an article meets the criteria listed above for A Class status, please list it below. A minimum of two uninvolved editors will review the article based on the A Class criteria (see chart above) and determine if the article passes or fails. In the event of a tie, the article will not be promoted to A Class. Reviewers will use the GA quick fail criteria as a screening process. Caution: this process may take several weeks.
 * Add A Class requests below


 * Reviewers: After selecting an article, remove it from the above list and place it on the A class assessment page at: Under Review.

WikiProject Oregon no longer uses the level classification for articles.

Assessment Log
The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available here.