Wikipedia:WikiProject Amusement Parks/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Amusement Parks
WikiProject
Project Navigation Links
Main project page talk
Portal
AP Project Articles Recent Changes
Participants
Departments
 → Assessment talk
 → Collaboration talk
 → Peer review talk
Useful links
Infoboxes and templates
Relevant categories talk
{{User AP Project}} talk
edit · changes

Welcome to the assessment department of the Amusement Parks WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality and priority of Wikipedia's Amusement Park 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.

Contents

[edit] How it works

The ratings are done through parameters in the {{AmusementParkProject}} project banner:

{{AmusementParkProject| class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The class= is the quality rating and the importance= is the priority of the article to this project.

Putting this template on the article's talk page causes the article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Amusement park articles by quality and Category:Amusement park articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated work list.

Amusement park
articles		 Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
B 1 9 6 16 32
Start 3 16 13 100 132
Stub 4 13 99 116
List 1 11 12
Assessed 2 12 26 26 226 292
Unassessed 1 6 185 192
Total 2 12 27 32 411 484

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:Amusement park 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.

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How do I get an article added to the project? 
Just add {{AmusementParkProject}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else. Anyone can add an article to the project.
How can I get my article rated? 
If you have added the article to the project, please list it in the section for assessment requests below. All unrated articles show up in the Category:Unassessed amusement park articles, and on various work lists.
Who can assess articles? 
Anyone 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.
Where can I get more comments about my article? 
You can ask on the Amusement Parks Project Assessment talk page.
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 at Amusement Parks Project talk page 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 project Assessment talk page.

[edit] Quality assessments

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{AmusementParkProject}} project banner on its talk page:

{{AmusementParkProject| class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}
Featured article FA
A
Good article GA
B
Start
Stub
List
Template
Category
Disambig
???
Needed

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

[edit] Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]
Label Criterion Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Featured article FA
{{FA-Class}}		 Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. No further additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible. Tourette Syndrome (as of July 2007)
Featured list FL
{{FL-Class}}		 Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured lists" status, and meet the current criteria for featured lists. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough list; a great source for encyclopedic information. No further additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible. FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives (as of January 2008)
A
{{A-Class}}		 Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy (peer-reviewed where appropriate). Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points. Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage. Durian (as of March 2007)
Good article GA
{{GA-Class}}		 The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise acceptable. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but having completed the Good article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class. Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, or excessive information. Adequate for most purposes, but other encyclopedias could do a better job. Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time. International Space Station (as of February 2007)
B
{{B-Class}}		 Commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process. Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles. Useful to many, but not all, readers. A casual reader flipping through articles would feel that they generally understood the topic, but a serious student or researcher trying to use the material would have trouble doing so, or would risk error in derivative work. Considerable editing is still needed, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors. Articles for which cleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. Jammu and Kashmir (as of October 2007) has a lot of helpful material but needs more prose content and references.
Start
{{Start-Class}}		 The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:
  • a particularly useful picture or graphic
  • multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • a subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
 Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded. Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an article cleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage. Real analysis (as of November 2006)
Stub
{{Stub-Class}}		 The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. Coffee table book (as of July 2005)


[edit] Importance assessment

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{AmusementParkProject}} project banner on its talk page:

{{AmusementParkProject| class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}
Top
High
Mid
Low
???

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

[edit] Importance scale

Label Criteria Example
Top The article is one of the core topics about Amusement parks. General and main articles related to
  • amusement parks Amusement parks
  • types of amusement parks
  • history
  • essential mechanical articles,
  • any subparts of those main articles
High Rides in general and ride categories in general
  • All manufacturers
  • Any prolific persons associated with the topic (eg. , designers, planners, owners
  • particularly notable parks, either because of
    • historical significance
    • park set some record or milestone, or
    • popularity of park
    • big chain parks
  • particularly notable rides, either because of
    • historical significance
    • ride set some record or milestone, or
    • popularity of ride
Mid Most parks and rides will fall in this category:
  • Not record breakers or highly notable
  • Most water parks
 This will include most of Screamscape's "Small Parks" (at least the American/European ones)
Low Any loosely related articles. RollerCoaster Tycoon, American Coaster Enthusiasts, No Limits (software)
??? You are not sure about the article's importance. Any article in the Category:Unknown-importance amusement park articles

[edit] Requesting an assessment

If you are adding a new article and not sure about the assessment or 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.


[edit] Assessment log

Amusement Parks articles:
Index · Statistics · Log

See Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Amusement park articles by quality log for the log of all articles added to the project.

The logs on that page are generated automatically (approximately every three days); please don't add entries to them by hand.