Wikipedia:WikiProject AfroCreatives/Assessment
The assessment ratings include two components: Quality and Importance.
Quality: A priority for AfroCreatives WikiProject is to encourage not just an increase in the volume of Wikipedia edits, but a continued improvement in the quality of edits.
Wikipedia articles are assessed using a grading system, with each grade or “class”, an important measure of their quality. The grading system allows ACWP and our community of editors to evaluate and track the progress of individual African Film and Television articles and the category more broadly.
Click here to see a chart with explanations of the various Class of articles.
The assessment ratings mentioned here (see below table) have no relationship whatsoever to grading in education or review scores like A/B/C/D/F or other rating systems (10-point scale, 5-star system, etc.) that you might see on homework and product reviews. They represent the amount of work needed to bring the article to the next rating, which depends on both the quality of the writing and the depth of coverage of the topic, which greatly varies by subject.
Note that the differences between Stub, Start, and C classes are fairly subjective; at those ratings, the best way to improve the article is to look at the specific criteria for B-Class and aim to satisfy those. Learn more
The overwhelming majority of African film and TV articles are Stubs. ACWP aims for a majority of articles to graduate to a minimum status of Start while always aiming for higher.
Importance: There is a separate scale for rating articles for importance or priority, which is unrelated to the quality scale. Unlike the quality scale, which applies to all Wikipedia articles, the priority scale varies based on a Wikipedia project’s scope.
For example, Madelaine Petsch, an American-South African actress, is included in ACWP+film because she is categorized, among other things, as a South African actress. Yet, because her filmography does not include any African storytelling nor any African productions or co-productions, her importance to ACWP+film is assessed as “low.”
The majority of ACWP+film articles have not been assessed for importance, but following the 2025 edit-a-thon, a team of ACWP raters will begin evaluating all the articles edited or created during the campaign. They will assess their quality and importance, providing a valuable quantitative and qualitative analysis of the campaign’s impact.
| AfroCreatives articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | ||
 FA
|
1 | 4 | 5 | ||||
 GA
|
1 | 14 | 15 | ||||
| B | 2 | 5 | 8 | 78 | 93 | ||
| C | 1 | 7 | 65 | 887 | 960 | ||
| Start | 6 | 5 | 155 | 3,070 | 3,236 | ||
| Stub | 58 | 3,254 | 3,312 | ||||
| List | 1 | 184 | 185 | ||||
| NA | 1 | 2 | 1,668 | 1,671 | |||
| Assessed | 9 | 19 | 290 | 1,668 | 7,491 | 9,477 | |
| Unassessed | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Total | 9 | 19 | 290 | 1,668 | 7,492 | 9,478 | |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 40,223 | Ω = 5.28 | |||||
You can also search for articles in these assessment classes per country!
Featured articles . Good articles . B-Class articles . C-Class articles . Start-Class articles . Stubs