Wikipedia:WikiProject Userboxes/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Userboxes! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Userbox pages. 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.


 * V1.0 index logs, sortings, stats, etc.
 * Userboxes Project statistics – Statistices for our rating system
 * Userboxes pages by quality log

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the WikiProject Userboxes project banner; and one or more of these if applicable:
 * the appropriate subcategory of Category:Userboxes pages by quality,
 * the appropriate subcategory of Category:Userboxes pages by importance,
 * Category:Userboxes pages needing attention,

There is also Category:NA-importance Userboxes pages (use tag class=NA) for things like redirect pages, templates, categories, images, etc and and Category:File-Class Userboxes pages for images (use tag class=Image).

These are our most popular pages: WikiProject Userboxes/Popular pages.

Frequently asked questions

 * How can I get my article rated? : As a member of the WikiProject Userboxes, you can do it yourself. If you're unsure, list it in the requesting an assessment section below.
 * Who can assess articles? : Any member of the WikiProject Userboxes is free to add—or change—the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
 * 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.
 * Where can I get more comments about my article? : Contact someone through the talk page who will handle it or assign the issue to someone. You may also list it for a Peer review.
 * What if I don't agree with a rating? : Relist it as a request.
 * Aren't the ratings subjective? : Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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.

Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the WikiProject Userboxes project banner on its talk page. You can learn the syntax by looking at the talk pages in edit mode and by reading the info below.

This is the rating syntax (ratings and dates are samples, change to what applies to the article in question):
 * displays the default banner, showing the project info and only ??? for the quality and importance parameters.
 * all assessed articles should have quality and importance filled in. Leaving the other parameters off does not hurt anything.
 * if an article needs immediate attention, add the attention tag and please leave talk notes as to why. "yes" is the only valid parameter here. If it doesn't need attention, leave the parameter off.
 * if an article has been the SATM or COTM, these tags get added in this format.
 * if an article needs immediate attention, add the attention tag and please leave talk notes as to why. "yes" is the only valid parameter here. If it doesn't need attention, leave the parameter off.
 * if an article has been the SATM or COTM, these tags get added in this format.
 * if an article has been the SATM or COTM, these tags get added in this format.
 * if an article has been the SATM or COTM, these tags get added in this format.

The following values may be used for the class parameter:


 * FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Userboxes articles)
 * A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Userboxes articles)
 * GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Userboxes articles)
 * B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Userboxes articles)
 * C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Userboxes articles)
 * Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Userboxes articles)
 * Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Userboxes articles)
 * Image (for images; adds pages to Category:Userboxes images)
 * Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Userboxes articles)
 * Template (for templates; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Userboxes articles)
 * NA (for other non-article pages, such as re-directs or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Userboxes articles). NA means "non-article", NOT "non-applicable."

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

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:


 * Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Userboxes articles)
 * High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Userboxes articles)
 * Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Userboxes articles)
 * Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Userboxes articles)

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Quality scale
Note: A B-class article should have at least one reference.

Importance scale
The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of military history. Importance does not equate to quality; a featured article could rate 'mid' on importance.

''Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated. Rate international region/country-specific articles from the prespective of someone from that region.''

Requesting an assessment or re-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 assign the article the attention flag, leave reasoning on its talk page, and leave a message on the project talk page.
 * 1) Add articles here! Newest requests on the BOTTOM
 * 2) Like this (and put "(re-)assessment request" in your edit summary of this assessment page), leave reasons if a reassement.