Wikipedia:WikiProject Volcanoes/Volcanism of Canada task force/Assessment

Welcome to the assessment department of the Volcanism of Canada task force! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about Canadian volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment 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 task force banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Volcanism of Canada task force articles by quality and Category:Volcanism of Canada task force articles by importance.

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 Volcanism of Canada task force is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
 * 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 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!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

See also: WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ

Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the task force banner on its talk page:

Quality scale
This table is transcluded here, and is identical to the one at Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment.

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 volcanologists and others working within the field.

''This table has been written specifically for the Volcanism of Canada task force, please read it carefully prior to making assessments of importance. It is currently UNDER CONSTRUCTION, please revise it as needed.''

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.

Assessment log

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

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.

Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Volcanism of Canada task force articles by quality log

Articles in need of expansion and cleanup
A number of articles

Worklist

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