Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance/Assessment
Finance articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
FA | 3 | 2 | 5 | ||||
FL | 1 | 1 | |||||
GA | 11 | 13 | 5 | 29 | |||
B | 18 | 54 | 101 | 63 | 236 | ||
C | 14 | 90 | 234 | 380 | 2 | 720 | |
Start | 8 | 160 | 771 | 1,836 | 21 | 2,796 | |
Stub | 1 | 46 | 404 | 1,627 | 1 | 29 | 2,108 |
List | 1 | 3 | 19 | 72 | 20 | 115 | |
Book | 10 | 10 | |||||
Category | 1 | 504 | 505 | ||||
Disambig | 1 | 20 | 21 | ||||
File | 10 | 10 | |||||
Portal | 1 | 1 | |||||
Project | 1 | 1 | |||||
Redirect | 74 | 74 | |||||
Template | 1 | 124 | 125 | ||||
Other | 2 | 6 | 8 | ||||
Assessed | 42 | 365 | 1,547 | 3,988 | 765 | 58 | 6,765 |
Unassessed | 1 | 1 | 99 | 101 | |||
Total | 42 | 365 | 1,548 | 3,989 | 765 | 157 | 6,866 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = | 27,140Ω = 5.11 |
Welcome to the assessment department of the Finance WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Finance related articles. 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.
The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Finance}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Finance articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Contents
Frequently asked questions[edit]
- 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 Finance WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
- 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.
- 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, 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.
Instructions[edit]
An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Finance}} project banner on its talk page:
- {{WikiProject Finance|class=???}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Quality scale for assessment criteria):
FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Finance articles) | FA | |
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Finance articles) | A | |
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Finance articles) | GA | |
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Finance articles) | B | |
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Finance articles) | C | |
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Finance articles) | Start | |
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Finance articles) | Stub | |
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Finance articles) | FL | |
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Finance articles) | List |
For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:
After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added either to the article's talk page or to the /Comments subpage which will appear as a link next to the assessment. Adding comments will add the article to Category:Finance articles with comments. Comments that are added to the /Comments subpages will be transcluded onto the automatically generated work list pages in the Comments column.
Quality scale[edit]
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FA | The article has attained featured article status by passing an official review.
|
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. | Water fluoridation (as of August 2014) |
||
A | The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from this WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
|
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. Peer review may help. | Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014) |
||
GA | The article has attained good article status by passing an official review.
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (but not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. | 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. | YouTube (as of August 2014) |
||
B | The article is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
|
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 also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. | Apple Inc. (as of August 2014) |
||
C | The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup.
|
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. | Bishop (chess) (as of August 2014) |
||
Start | An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete. It might or might not cite adequate reliable sources.
|
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. | Interval vector (as of February 2014) |
||
Stub | A very basic description of the topic. However, all very-bad-quality articles will fall into this category.
|
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. | Crescent Falls (as of February 2013) |
||
FL | The article has attained featured list status.
|
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. | List of National Basketball Association season assists leaders (as of April 2014) |
||
List | Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, 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 Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 1947 (as of January 2013) |
Importance scale[edit]
Importance | Criteria | Example |
---|---|---|
Top | Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field. | Kindergarten |
High | Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Labour Party (UK) |
Mid | Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | 0.999... |
Low | Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. | G cell |
Requesting an 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.
- Stable value funds
- International Bank Account Number
- Solvency II Directive - I view this to be of high importance with potential impact on cost of living, retirement costs and infrastructure investment (all hot topics in UK). Current uncertainty re the status of the Directive is very damaging. Even it is enacted, it is unclear whether there would be sufficient resource to be able to implement the requirements. This already gets a significant amount of press coverage in the UK and I would expect this to increase towards the referendum on EU membership which does look as if it will go ahead after the next general election (there seems to be party political consensus on this.)
Assessment log[edit]
For a list of article additions and assessment changes in the last 30 days, see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Finance/Assessment/Log.