Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aviation WikiProject
General information
Main project page	talk
Style guide	talk
Announcements and open tasks	talk
→ Maintenance	talk
→ New articles (archive)	talk
Assessment department (Log)	talk
Collaboration department	talk
Peer review department	talk
Contest	talk
Showcase
→ Featured articles (15)
→ Good articles (54)
→ Featured picture gallery
Portals
Project organization Coordinators talk Members talk Project banner talk Outreach department talk  → Current newsletter Project category talk
Templates Infobox templates  → Aviation infobox talk  → Airport infobox talk  → Airline infobox talk  → Aircraft infobox talk  → Aviator infobox talk  → Aircraft accident infobox talk  → Company infobox talk Navigation boxes talk Featured article advice
Sub-projects Aircraft project talk Airlines project talk  → Defunct Airlines project talk Airports project talk Gliding project talk Rotorcraft talk Military aviation talk Aviation accident talk Air sports task force talk
This box: view • talk • edit  · changes

Welcome to the assessment department of the Aviation WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's aviation articles. While much of the work is (may in the future be) 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 {{WPAVIATION}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Aviation articles by quality, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The running totals for aviation assessments are shown in the table below, also found here, and the overall project is found at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index.

Contents 1 Frequently asked questions 2 Instructions 2.1 Quality scale 3 Statistics 3.1 Current stats 3.2 Task force statistics 4 Requesting an assessment

[edit] Frequently asked questions

See also the general assessment FAQ.

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 {{WPAVIATION}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

3. Someone put a {{WPAVIATION}} 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 Aviation 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 quality scale 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; this is documented in the assessment scale.

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. 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.

8. Where can I get more comments about an article? 

The review department can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for peer review there.

9. 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; this is documented in the assessment scale.

10. 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!

11. 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, you can go to the main project discussion page, or contact a project member directly.

[edit] Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameters in the {{WPAVIATION}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{WPAVIATION
|class=
}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class aviation articles)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class aviation articles)
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class aviation articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class aviation articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class aviation articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class aviation articles)
• Category (adds articles to Category:Category-Class aviation articles)
• Template (adds articles to Category:Template-Class aviation articles)
• Image (adds articles to Category:Image-Class aviation articles)
• List (adds articles to Category:List-Class aviation articles)
• NA (for disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article aviation pages)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed aviation articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

[edit] Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]

Label	Criterion	Reader's experience	Editor's experience	Example
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.	Battle of Edson's Ridge
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
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.	Operation Linebacker II
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.	15th Marine Expeditionary Unit
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.	F/A-18E/F_Super_Hornet
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.	1st Battalion 2nd Marines
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.	16th Infantry Regiment (South Korea)
List {{List-Class}}	Meets the criteria of a Stand-alone List, which is a page that contains primarily a list.	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.	Busiest airports in the United Kingdom by total passenger traffic
Template {{Template-Class}}	Is any type of template. The most common types of template used in the WikiProject are infoboxes and navboxes.	Serves different purposes depending upon the type of template. Infoboxes go at the upper right of a page and are a way of providing easy access to important pieces of introductory infomation about the subject. Navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page, and are for the purpose of uniting a group of related articles into an easily accessible format for inclusion on every page listed in the navbox.	Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information.	Template:Aviation lists
Disambig {{Dab-Class}}	Is any disambiguation page.	Serves to distinguish article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic.	Pay particular attention to the proper naming of disambiguation articles, they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title.	Eureka Airport, Melbourne Airport (disambiguation)
Category {{Cat-Class}}	Is any category.			Category:Aircraft by type

[edit] Statistics

[edit] Current stats

Aviation WikiProject assessment statistics Aviation articles Importance None Total Quality FA 15 15 FL 1 1 A 7 7 GA 54 54 B 304 304 Start 8454 8454 Stub 13311 13311 List 1139 1139 Assessed 23285 23285 Total 23285 23285 worklist • log • category

Article class Project Aviation Aircraft Airlines Airports Military Aviation Aviation accident Rotorcraft Gliding Defunct Airlines Air sports  % of Total FA 15 3 3 1 18 3 0 1 0 0 0.051% FL 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.003% A 7 3 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0.024% GA 54 5 3 10 18 9 0 3 0 0 0.185% B 304 249 14 8 469 7 8 1 2 0 1.042% Start 8461 3230 1024 1371 4209 326 215 155 157 43 29.008% Stub 13313 2357 1345 6835 2405 188 160 166 513 29 45.642% List 1139 188 356 450 0 21 5 2 5 0 3.905% Template 655 347 91 125 0 5 14 7 0 5 2.246% Category 4143 2353 489 639 0 28 36 59 162 121 14.204% Disambig 404 13 8 374 0 1 2 0 2 0 1.385% Image 64 37 10 2 0 1 1 0 4 0 0.219% Portal 595 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.04% Unassessed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Total 29168 8791 3346 9817 7274 589 441 394 893 198 100%  % of Total 100% 30.139% 11.471% 33.657% 24.938% 2.019% 1.512% 1.351% 3.062% 0.679%

[edit] Task force statistics

Aircraft WikiProject assessment statistics Aircraft articles Importance None Total Quality FA 3 3 A 3 3 GA 5 5 B 249 249 Start 3227 3227 Stub 2357 2357 List 188 188 Assessed 6032 6032 Total 6032 6032 worklist • log • category	Airline WikiProject assessment statistics Airline articles Importance None Total Quality FA 3 3 GA 3 3 B 14 14 Start 1024 1024 Stub 1345 1345 List 356 356 Assessed 2745 2745 Total 2745 2745 worklist • log • category	Airport WikiProject assessment statistics Airport articles Importance None Total Quality FA 1 1 GA 10 10 B 8 8 Start 1370 1370 Stub 6834 6834 List 450 450 Assessed 8673 8673 Total 8673 8673 worklist • log • category
Military aviation task force assessment statistics Military aviation articles Importance None Total Quality FA 18 18 A 18 18 GA 18 18 B 471 471 Start 4176 4176 Stub 2384 2384 Assessed 7085 7085 Total 7085 7085 worklist • log • category	Rotorcraft task force assessment statistics Rotorcraft articles Importance None Total Quality B 8 8 Start 214 214 Stub 160 160 List 5 5 Assessed 387 387 Total 387 387 worklist • log • category	Gliding WikiProject assessment statistics Gliding articles Importance None Total Quality FA 1 1 GA 3 3 B 1 1 Start 155 155 Stub 166 166 List 2 2 Assessed 328 328 Total 328 328 worklist • log • category
Aviation accident task force assessment statistics Aviation accident articles Importance None Total Quality FA 3 3 GA 9 9 B 7 7 Start 326 326 Stub 188 188 List 21 21 Assessed 554 554 Total 554 554 worklist • log • category	Air sports task force assessment statistics Air sports articles Importance None Total Quality Start 43 43 Stub 29 29 Assessed 72 72 Total 72 72 worklist • log • category	Defunct Airlines WikiProject assessment statistics Defunct Airlines articles Importance None Total Quality B 2 2 Start 204 204 Stub 513 513 List 5 5 Assessed 724 724 Total 724 724 worklist • log • category

[edit] Requesting an assessment

• 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.
• If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, or wish to have it classified as an A-Class article, please use the WikiProject Review department instead.
• If you want help improving an article, try the collaboration department.

1. B-45 Tornado I expanded this artical, added referances and included some missing stats, could I please get a review. FLJuJitsu 26 Sept 07 00:13

   Article remains a Start-Class per discussion on talk page. --Born2flie (talk) 07:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

2. Cessna 165 - I usually rate articles, however I was the orignial creator and main contributor and would rather let another editor rate my work. Thanks -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 22:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

   I took a look, I think it needs an image if possible, and more content with more references. I will look and see if I have anything. Besides that IMHO it is a good article. --Colputt 00:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

   I thought it maet coverage and accuracy, and have ticked the box. However, it is low on suppourting materials and this is preventing it from elevation to B class.ANHL (talk) 13:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

   Article remains Start-Class. --Born2flie (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

3. Saab 37 Viggen I think this article after the recent weeks of editing should be upgraded from Start into B-class. T96 grh 15:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

   Article is currently undergoing Peer review. --Born2flie (talk) 07:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

4. LagunAir by MarkamBey 02:51, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

   Assessed as start-class. Needs a fair bit of work to go any further (refernces, history, etc.) - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 04:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

   Agreed. Reviewed again today and added B-class checklist and comments. Wexcan (talk) 00:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

5. Chicago Midway International Airport - is a well written, nicely referenced article. It is currently GA-class but seems to meet A-class Criteria. This is also listed in the Aviation Review department under the A-class review of Chicago Midway International Airport. Sox23 04:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

   Article will be assessed upon completion of A-Class review. --Born2flie (talk) 07:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

6. Lockheed XF-104 I would welcome comments on this article with a view to promotion to B class, thanks. Nimbus227 (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

   Article was rated B-class by Trevor MacInnis. Wexcan (talk) 00:50, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

7. Reeve Aleutian Airways has been expanded, needs reassessment. Would appreciate comments on what else needs doing too. Mjroots (talk) 22:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

   Comments left on talk page, good work. Nimbus227 (talk) 13:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

   • Assessed as start class. Nimbus227 (talk) 13:02, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

8. Reeve Aleutian Airways I have addressed the referencing issue in the B Class checklist, can somebody reassess please? Mjroots (talk) 08:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

   Article is now rated B. Marcusmax (talk) 01:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

9. British Airways Flight 38 Is this really still a stub? Mjroots (talk) 11:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

   Article grew quickly! Reassessed as start, probably can't be B-class until some time has passed and all the facts in the case are revealed. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

10. EasyJet Fits B-class criteria, would be good to have another set of eyes to look over it. Wexcan (talk) 01:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

    Self-assesed as B-class as no response here, please feel free to review and change if neccesary. Wexcan  Talk  16:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

11. CH-46 Sea Knight, military project is assessing as a B, Aviation has it as a start class. I don't know how long it has been since its last assesment. --Trashbag (talk) 02:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

    Looks good, I completed the B-class checklist and reassessed as B. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 22:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

12. CH-47 Chinook - same story as the Sea Knight. Thanks for reviewing it so quickly and sorry I didn't think of putting this up here at the same time... --Trashbag (talk) 00:19, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

    Article is now B-Class and Checklist is complete. -Marcusmax (talk) 03:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

13. Roanoke Regional Airport Please reassess. I recently expanded this article, added references and added several new sections about its history, the terminal, runways, etc. Thanks! Patriarca12 (talk) 02:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

    Article is now B-Class and Checklist is complete. -Marcusmax (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

14. Los Angeles Airways Flight 417, article has been expanded. Thanks! --Trashbag (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

    Assessed as Start-Class article, added in B-Class checklist and partially completed assessment for B-Class. --Born2flie (talk) 07:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

15. Powered hang glider is a nicely referenced article. It is currently rated as B-class and has matured a lot in the last year and now it seems to meet A-class criteria. Thanks, BatteryIncluded (talk) 16:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

    Moved request to Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Peer review#A-Class review. --Born2flie (talk) 07:23, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

16. Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport The article is an example to all airline articles. It provides up-to-date, factual data that flows smoothly into the article. The terminal descriptions and airport history sections are in-depth, and the airline destinations are constantly updated providing a greater experience to the article. Currently, it is rated GA-Class, but the content definately boasts A-Class material.--Golich17 (talk) 21:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

    I'll put it up for an A-class review at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Aviation/Peer_review#A-Class_review. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 22:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

17. VVA-14, Kamov Ka-226, Kamov Ka-22 Have all been significantly updated, would like some input as to where they now lie on the scale. Thanks A300st (talk) 07:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
18. P-39 Aircobra, the referencing and citation was not met. I added citations for what was marked as missing. What do you think about the article now?Markus Becker02 (talk) 11:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)