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.
Urban studies and planning articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
4 | 3 | 7 | |||||
1 | 1 | 2 | 4 | ||||
8 | 11 | 49 | 9 | 77 | |||
B | 12 | 36 | 45 | 85 | 61 | 239 | |
C | 27 | 83 | 110 | 330 | 161 | 711 | |
Start | 30 | 120 | 178 | 736 | 1 | 564 | 1,629 |
Stub | 2 | 10 | 116 | 415 | 4 | 282 | 829 |
List | 6 | 27 | 80 | 4 | 149 | 266 | |
Category | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1,189 | 1,194 | ||
Disambig | 1 | 5 | 1 | 7 | |||
File | 33 | 33 | |||||
Portal | 1 | 1 | |||||
Project | 10 | 10 | |||||
Template | 1 | 26 | 27 | ||||
NA | 5 | 11 | 12 | 133 | 161 | ||
Other | 1 | 21 | 22 | ||||
Assessed | 72 | 270 | 505 | 1,716 | 1,427 | 1,227 | 5,217 |
Unassessed | 1 | 1 | 1 | 200 | 203 | ||
Total | 72 | 271 | 506 | 1,717 | 1,427 | 1,427 | 5,420 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 16,829 | Ω = 4.82 |
FAQ
[edit]- 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
[edit]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
[edit]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
{{WikiProject Urban studies and planning| class=Stub | ...}}
- 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.
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|
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) |
|
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) |
|
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) |
|
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. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. | 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 |
Importance assessment
[edit]- Basic syntax
{{planning| class=stub | importance=Low}}
- 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
Top | Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopaedia | add content here |
High | Subject contributes a depth of knowledge | add content here |
Mid | Subject fills in more minor details | add content here |
Low | Subject is mainly of specialist interest | add content here |
None | Unassessed | Unassessed-importance Urban studies and planning articles |
For more information, refer to Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria#Importance of topic
Related projects
[edit]Two other templates can be used to replace {{planning}}, as appropriate:
- {{architecture}}
Architecture Unassessed | |||||||
|
- {{Landscape}}
This article covers subjects relevant to Landscape architecture |
Participants
[edit]Requests for assessment
[edit]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.
Requests for A-Class status
[edit]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