Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the Religion WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Religion related articles. 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 WPReligion project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Religion articles by quality and Category:Religion articles by importance, 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 Religion WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
 * 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.
 * 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.

Quality assessments
After assessing an article's quality, any comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

Importance assessment
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the WikiProject Religion project banner on its talk page:



The following values may be used for importance assessments:
 * Top – The article is about one of the core topics of religion as listed in Religion topics. Adds articles to Category:Top-importance Religion articles
 * High – The article is about the most well-known or culturally or historically significant aspects of religion. Adds articles to Category:High-importance Religion articles
 * Mid – The article is about a topic within the religion field that may or may not be commonly known outside the religion community. Adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Religion articles
 * Low – The article is about a topic that is highly specialized within the religion field and is not generally common knowledge outside the religion community. Adds articles to Category:Low-importance Religion articles
 * Unknown – Any article which is not assessed on the importance scale is automatically added to the Category:Unknown-importance Religion articles.

Importance scale
Given the number and variety of articles with which this project shall be dealing, I believe that we should devote a good deal of attention in the short run to determining which of the articles we consider to be of greatest importance to the project. We now have a page at WikiProject Religion/Assessment/Top-importance articles where we can discuss which articles should receive top-importance ranking. Any and all input is more than welcome.

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.


 * 1) Alpha_et_Omega New text with many new refs added and general clean-up, should now be higher than Start Class.
 * 2) Catholic Church-Requesting review of this article to raise it above C-class status, as editors have made significant improvement.TopazStar (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) Bhagavad Gita - Requesting review for GA quality class, as I have majorly re-organized and cleaned it up. Adelle Frank (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) Taoic religion - Recently passed GA review. Started with this, expanded it to this, which includes editor notes for expansion, earning the GA pass. Looking for outside input to see if others think this would appropriately be rated A-Class and what project participants think needs to be done to pass a WP:FAC review.Vassyana 10:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Ismailism - I recently rewrote most of the article and have tried to make it as high quality as I could. --Enzuru 21:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Sant Nirankari Mission - I have added new content and done as much referencing as I could. I would need some sort of rating and comments to make it even better. Would appreciate your feedback. Thanks!
 * 7) Ayyavazhi - An extremely well-referenced and lengthy article which is written in Summary style with main article for each sections. It seems right to fit as a Good article. Any one pls tale a look into it.
 * 8) Sai Baba of Shirdi - it's just received GA status and I think it could be brought to A class. Kkrystian 17:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 9) Tamara Siuda -- Significant changes have been made in the past month or so, including layout, content, and the addition of a variety of references. Was not rated under the Religion project before, I believe now to be "GA". IanCheesman (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 10) Kemetic Orthodoxy -- Complete re-write took place over the past few months, including layout, content, and references. Article is now more than four times the original size, and layout is largely based on that of other religion pages.  Was not rated under the Religion project before, I believe now to be "GA". IanCheesman (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * 11) Share International -- New information added about essential philosophy, incorrect information deleted, new pictures added Camillaworld 15:22,8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 12) Lynn de Silva -- New biography article. It has been refined and reviewed quite a bit over the past few months, so I would appreciate your rating and feedback. Thanks! Ldesilva (talk) 03:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 13) History of religions -- I would think this to be a high importance article, but its currently lacking in many ways. Reading through the talk page, it seems like it has been fomred by a bad merge of two other articles. KalevTait (talk) 18:04, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 14) Religions of Kerala -- I think this is a very intersting article considering unique mixture of people of different faiths in this Indian state. This article still requires some images and has still incomplete sections. Sarvagyana guru (talk) 06:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 15) Dawoodi Bohra -- Please rate as I made some changes to the article. It was not rated before Sherenk (talk) 08:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * 16) Mithraic Mysteries -- I have made a lot of changes to this controversial and previously rather dodgy article.  A new rating would probably be appropriate. Roger Pearse (talk) 21:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * 17) Sol Invictus -- Most parts of this article have been completely rewritten.
 * 18) Theology -- extensively rewritten, referenced, and cleaned up since last quality assessment (C). --mahigton (talk) 00:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 19) Mormonism and Islam -- Huge rewrite, major additions; this article hasn't yet been rated by this particular project.  Would appreciate your opinion on it. - Ecjmartin (talk) 02:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 20) Joseph Campbell -- I haven't been able to find when the last review of the article was; it has been greatly improved over the last year and a half, and would be worth a fresh review.  David Kudler (talk) 01:00, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 21) Ecumenical Institute for Study and Dialogue -- Please review this new article. Thanks! Ldesilva (talk) 14:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * 22) Creativity (religion) -- A review of this article would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks in advance!  --SCochran4 (talk) 03:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 23) Mithras -- This article has been completely rewritten since February and the talk page suggests the changes were controversial.  Could the article be re-rated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by   209.68.2.181  (talk • contribs)  22:35, 25 August 2011 (UTC) I played some part in the changes since February, and agree that a new rating would be helpful. Kalidasa 777 (talk) 22:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 24) Please assess Moon-God Allah.Nightryder84 (talk) 19:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * 25) Hyper-Calvinism - I'm planning on doing a rewrite, but need to know where the article stands first. ReformedArsenal (talk) 13:36, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 26) Kami -- Requesting a review for this article as it has been greatly improved in the last month and might be ready for C class. Pearly18 (talk) 00:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 27) Pistis Sophia one of the main sources on gnosticism. Should be of importance for WikiProject religion and needs assessment on quality scale.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 10:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 28) Jizya- This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale and it's really well written and sourced. Thanks.Truth-seeker2004 (talk) 15:57, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 29) Soka Gakkai- This article had been improved for the pass few month with many citation put into the article. Requesting a review for this article. Kelvintjy (talk) 04:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * 30) Yahweh - This article's focus is fairly debated, it seems biased, and it may not cover everything that it should. I have not contributed to it personally but question whether a B rating on the quality scale is really appropriate.  -KaJunl (talk) 16:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * 31) Abu Hanifa Mosque - I would appreciate it if this article gets assessed after the amount of hard work that was devoted into it. Hashima20 (talk) 20:49, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 32) Frederick Denison Maurice - Please reassess this article. I have made significant changes. Vejlefjord (talk) 22:45, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * 33) Absolute (philosophy) - Reassessment please. I re-did the article from the bones up. CircularReason (talk) 08:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 34) Superstition - Currently rated as Top, despite not being listed at Religion topics. From the scale, I'd consider it as High. I rated List of superstitions as Mid, but I'd not be averse to a High rating. Paradoctor (talk) 14:40, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 35) Ioann Bereslavsky - Not rated article --Yolanda95 (talk) 10:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Yolanda95
 * 36) Christianization has had a total rewrite, and it is no longer a start class article. It is not of low importance as its content covers one of the most singularly important topics in Christianity, listed on the important topics list in two places (aspects and Religion and society), and it does so for all of Christian history.Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * 37) Fifth Monarchists; rewrite and update of "C" Class article, either a "B" or possibly a "GA"? Robinvp11 (talk) 14:48, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 38) Sikhism in Italy - I have significantly updated this article. Completely transformed. Please can get a second review now.--Jattlife121 (talk) 14:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Assessment log

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