Wikipedia:WikiProject Biathlon/Assessment
| Main | Project talk | Assessment | To do | Wanted pages |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Class
[edit]An article's quality assessment is recorded using the |class= parameter in the {{WikiProject banner shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Biathlon}} banner template on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.
The following standard grades may be used to describe the quality of mainspace articles (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):
| FA | (for featured articles only; adds them to the FA-Class Biathlon articles category) |  FA |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| FL | (for featured lists only; adds them to the FL-Class Biathlon articles category) | FL |
|
| A | (for articles that passed a formal peer review only; adds them to the A-Class Biathlon articles category) |  A |
|
| GA | (for good articles only; adds them to the GA-Class Biathlon articles category) |  GA |
|
| B | (for articles that satisfy all of the B-Class criteria; adds them to the B-Class Biathlon articles category) | B | |
| C | (for substantial articles; adds them to the C-Class Biathlon articles category) | C | |
| Start | (for developing articles; adds them to the Start-Class Biathlon articles category) | Start | |
| Stub | (for basic articles; adds them to the Stub-Class Biathlon articles category) | Stub | |
| List | (for stand-alone lists; adds them to the List-Class Biathlon articles category) | List | |
| NA | (for any other pages where assessment is unwarranted; adds them to the NA-Class Biathlon pages category) | NA | |
| ??? | (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in the Unassessed Biathlon articles category) | ??? |
For non-mainspace content, the following values may be used:
| Category | (for categories; adds them to the Category-Class Biathlon pages category) | Category | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Draft | (for drafts; adds them to the Draft-Class Biathlon pages category) | Draft | |
| File | (for files and timed text; adds them to the File-Class Biathlon pages category) | File | |
| Portal | (for portal pages; adds them to the Portal-Class Biathlon pages category) | Portal | |
| Project | (for project pages; adds them to the Project-Class Biathlon pages category) | Project | |
| Template | (for templates and modules; adds them to the Template-Class Biathlon pages category) | Template |
The following non-standard assessment grades for mainspace content may be used at a WikiProject's discretion:
| Disambig | (for disambiguation pages; adds them to the Disambig-Class Biathlon pages category) | Disambig |
|---|
Importance
[edit]An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Biathlon}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Biathlon|importance=???}}
The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):
| Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Biathlon articles) | Top | |
| High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Biathlon articles) | High | |
| Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Biathlon articles) | Mid | |
| Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Biathlon articles) | Low | |
| NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Biathlon articles) | NA | |
| ??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Biathlon articles) | ??? |
| Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FA |
The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured article criteria:
A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.
|
Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | Cleopatra (as of June 2018) |
| FL |
The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
|
Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
| A |
The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria
The article meets the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history). |
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help. | Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014) |
| GA |
The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria
A good article is:
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. | Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. | Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019) |
| B | The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria
|
Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. | A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. | Psychology (as of January 2024) |
| C | The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
|
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. | Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems. | Wing (as of June 2018) |
| Start | An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
|
Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. | Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon. | Ball (as of September 2014) |
| Stub | A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. | Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant. | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. | Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014) |
| List | Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area. | There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader. | Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized. | List of literary movements |
- ^ Prose at the Good Article level is not expected to be at a professional level like it is for Featured Articles. Minor grammatical or style issues that do not impact clarity are not prohibitive of GA status.