Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the Paranormal WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's paranormal 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 Paranormal project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Paranormal articles by quality, 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 Paranormal to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
 * 3. Someone put a Wikiproject Paranormal 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 the Paranormal 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.
 * 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. 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? : The peer review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
 * 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.  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.
 * 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.

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 (format as #Name of article ). If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the peer review department instead.


 * 1) João de Deus (medium) - Was start, has now been improved a little
 * 2) Strangehaven - Big update
 * 3) Saqqara Bird - Significant overhaul of article.
 * 4) Kaz II - I gave the article a major update and expansion, please reassess Erebus Morgaine (talk) 18:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 5) Seth Material - Major update. Please reassess. 70.186.172.75 (talk) 13:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 6) International Fortean Organization - I gave the article a significant update and expansion, please assess, is beyond Start-rating TootsMojo (talk) 19:02, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * done. C-class -- &#123;{u&#124; Gtoffoletto  &#125;}  talk 09:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) The Ghost Club - I found it as a very synthetic stub and expanded it extensively with the addition of several references. I would like to know if my improvements were enough to bring it beyond Start rating. Thanks! McMarcoP (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * quickly reassessed as C. There are several citations needed. -- &#123;{u&#124; Gtoffoletto  &#125;}  talk 09:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The Mad Gasser of Mattoon
I've just re-added this to the project. Other projects on the article rate it a B-class. Totnesmartin 21:33, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Eastern Air Lines Flight 401
Another new addition to the project. Aviation project rates it as Start. Totnesmartin 17:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Assessed as C -- &#123;{u&#124; Gtoffoletto  &#125;}  talk 09:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Susan Blackmore
Another new addition to the project. Not rated yet by any project. Totnesmartin 17:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Honey Island Swamp monster
New article, obviously unrated. Totnesmartin (talk) 11:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Done -- &#123;{u&#124; Gtoffoletto  &#125;}  talk 09:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Cattle mutilation
I attempted merging horse-ripping into the cattle mutilation article. Several of the sources on the horse-ripping page are outdated so they have been left out in the transfer to the cattle mutilation page. The horse-ripping article will need to be deleted and redirected to cattle mutilation. Regards, Porkins8888
 * Started with C/Mid -- &#123;{u&#124; Gtoffoletto  &#125;}  talk 09:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Reinhold O. Schmidt
The page for contactee Reinhold O. Schmidt was recently restored following a Proposed deletion, and I've given it a major overhaul in hopes of passing GNG muster, neutrality standards, etc. Would love it if someone could take a look and give it project ratings.

Assessment log

 * The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.