Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Congress/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the U.S. Congress WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's United States Congress-related articles, using WikiProject U.S. Congress. 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 U.S. Congress project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of:
 * Category:U.S. Congress articles by quality
 * Category:U.S. Congress articles by importance, and
 * Category:WikiProject U.S. Congress,

which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

The final status box is generated automatically by a bot or manually by this web form.

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 Congress 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 scale
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed U.S. Congress articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below:

Subject assessment
When applying the WikiProject U.S. Congress template, editors ought to add a subject. This subject will put that article in a corresponding category as follows:

Requesting an assessment
If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, list it below.

Assessments to do

 * U.S. House Fiscal Year 2014 Budget (H. Con. Res. 25; 113th Congress) - Article needs assessment. HistoricMN44 (talk) 19:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Senate Fiscal Year 2014 Budget (S.Con.Res 8; 113th Congress) - Article needs assessment. HistoricMN44 (talk) 19:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Most of the Represenative bios need review for puff and PR language. Discussing how to frame this at User:Sj/Update_Congress. –  SJ  +  22:37, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * National Security Act of 1947 – I added significant improvements, so article needs assessment. -- Emilycs4970 (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * John Lewis Voting Rights Act - Article needs assessment. -- aaronneallucas (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Assessments done

 * Overman Committee User:Bsimmons666 - I created this article off of the requested articles page and have added to it significantly. Plenty of sources from old newspaper archives I've dug through, and some book resources from google books. Like User:Therefore above me, I believe it is ready to be graded.
 * United States House of Representatives elections, 2010 User:CylonCAG - We've significantly changed the article since we were last assessed. I think it should be given another look.
 * Twenty-first Amendment to the United States Constitution --ClemsonChuck (talk) 05:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC) - This page has not yet received any assessments. I've made significant improvements to the section concerning Court Rulings with the correct legal citations. It details the different of opinions on how significantly this Amendment should effect the distribution of power between Congress and the states when it comes to making laws concerning alcohol.  Luckily, unlike other parts of the Constitution, this Amendment has produced a history of Supreme Court decisions which is long enough to provide meaningful interpretation, but not so long that it becomes the subject of its own legal practice or law school curriculum.
 * John Jenrette- upgraded to Start-class --TommyBoy (talk) 20:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Stephen Lynch (politician)- Article was previously assessed as GA-class by another user. --TommyBoy (talk) 20:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Peter T. King, Stephen Fincher, and Quico Canseco articles have been assessed. --TommyBoy (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Champ Clark - Article assessed as Stub. --TommyBoy (talk) 06:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Tim Penny - Article assessed as Start-class by another user. --TommyBoy (talk) 20:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Nicholas Mavroules - Upgraded to Start-class. --TommyBoy (talk) 17:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Bill Nelson - Upgraded to C-class --TommyBoy (talk) 04:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Rick Crawford (politician) - Upgraded to Start-classs --TommyBoy (talk) 23:32, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Tulsi Gabbard: I significantly improved this article and tried my hand at initially assessing it. I'm not too sure about its importance, because Gabbard has drawn international attention (especially from India) because she'll be the first Hindu Congresswoman, but other than that she's more of domestic interest. Sumana Harihareswara 18:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Assessed as "B-Class; Mid-Importance; Person"—GoldRingChip  02:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Request an assessment on Rape and pregnancy controversies in United States elections, 2012. Article has been rewritten and is basically a new article.Casprings (talk) 03:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Assessed as "C-Class; Low-Importance; Events"—GoldRingChip 02:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Tim Wirth - Assessed as Start-class. --TommyBoy (talk) 04:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Debbie Dingell - Upgraded to C-class. --TommyBoy (talk) 22:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Frank J. Larkin - Assessed as Stub. --TommyBoy (talk) 23:23, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * John Salazar - Assessed as Start-class. --TommyBoy (talk) 23:23, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * United States Congress Joint Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies - Assessed as Start-class.--TommyBoy (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Lyman K. Bass - Upgraded to Start-class.--TommyBoy (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

General rules

 * Ordinal Congresses (1st Congress … 112 Congress) should be assessed:
 * class=list | importance=high | subject=event.