Wikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planning/Assessment

Welcome to the Assessment Department of the Urban studies and planning WikiProject. This group focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Urban studies and planning 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.

Assessment is done in a distributed system (with many people and automated "bots") when values are included for the two "parameters" in the planning project banner template, as described in the syntax below. The different values cause the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Urban studies and planning articles by quality and Category:Urban studies and planning articles by importance.

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 planning to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
 * 3. Someone put a planning 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 Urban studies and planning 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 article grading scheme 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.

Assessment instructions
The planning template may already exist on the talk page of an article, and anyone can add the template to a talk page. There are two values that can be used in the template for rating an article. Remember that these ratings are not absolute and can be changed at any time. The quality and importance of a topic is to be considered in the wide context of planning in all regions of the world throughout all of recorded history. The main criteria are suitability of the topic for inclusion in an encyclopedia and complete citation of source information.

Quality assessment
An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the planning project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):


 * Basic template syntax:


 * The word "class" to start with a lowercase c. Values can be Stub, stub or STUB, for example

The following values for "class= " may be used:
 * FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Urban studies and planning articles
 * Only for articles that are currently listed as featured articles)
 * A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Urban studies and planning articles
 * Only used for articles that have successfully passed through the A-Class review)
 * GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Urban studies and planning articles
 * Used only for articles that are currently listed as good articles)
 * B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Urban studies and planning articles)
 * Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Urban studies and planning articles)
 * Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Urban studies and planning articles)
 * NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Urban studies and planning articles)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Urban studies and planning articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Importance assessment

 * Basic syntax:


 * The word "importance" to start with a lowercase i. Values start with Uppercase, e.g. Low

Need: The article's priority or importance, regardless of its quality

For more information, refer to Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria

Related projects
Two other templates can be used to replace planning, as appropriate:


 * architecture


 * Landscape

Participants

 * Futurano 13:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Elekhh (talk) 06:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

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.


 * Physical plant significantly updated Physical plant. Added academic sources Johnnyhopkins214 (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Neighborhood planning
 * Regional planning
 * Infrastructure
 * Rawabi
 * Alley – Needs updating
 * Natural landscape
 * Community land trust - This article is of growing public importance but has not yet received an assessment.
 * Hengqin International Tennis Center. New article.
 * Done Dan arndt (talk) 00:19, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Requests for A-Class status
If you have made significant changes to a B-class or GA-class article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please list it at here for review