Wikipedia:WikiProject National Basketball Association/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut:
WP:NBA/A
WikiProject National Basketball Association
This project identifies, organizes and improves articles relating to the National Basketball Association on Wikipedia.
Statistics
857 articles (5 Featured Articles, 6 Featured Lists, 26 Good Articles) as of June 14  

This assessment page shows the results of recent assessments, shows the quality scale, and shows the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Assessment results

Contact with WP NBA
Article Date Quality Importance Comments
Atlanta Hawks February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Boston Celtics February 28, 2008 B Mid
Charlotte Bobcats February 28, 2008 B Mid
Chicago Bulls February 28, 2008 B High
Cleveland Cavaliers February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Dallas Mavericks February 28, 2008 B Mid
Denver Nuggets February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Detroit Pistons February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Golden State Warriors February 28, 2008 B Mid
Houston Rockets February 28, 2008 B Mid
Indiana Pacers February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Los Angeles Clippers February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Los Angeles Lakers February 28, 2008 B High
Memphis Grizzlies February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Miami Heat February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Milwaukee Bucks February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Minnesota Timberwolves February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
New Jersey Nets February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
New Orleans Hornets February 28, 2008 B Mid
New York Knicks February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Orlando Magic February 28, 2008 B Mid
Philadelphia 76ers February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
Phoenix Suns February 28, 2008 B High
Portland Trail Blazers February 28, 2008 B Mid Failed GA.
Sacramento Kings February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.
San Antonio Spurs February 28, 2008 B High
Seattle SuperSonics February 28, 2008 B Mid
Toronto Raptors May 12, 2007 Featured article FA Top Date is date featured.
Utah Jazz February 28, 2008 B Mid
Washington Wizards February 28, 2008 Start Mid No or some references.

[edit] Quality scale

Note: A B-class article should have at least one reference.

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 scale

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of hagiography. Importance does not equate to quality; a featured article could rate 'mid' on importance.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated. Rate international region/country-specific articles from the prespective of someone from that region.

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Subject or team is a "core" or "key" topic for the NBA. They define and determine the subject of the NBA WikiProject. Toronto Raptors
High Subject or team is notable in a significant and important way within the field of the NBA, but not necessarily outside it. Los Angeles Lakers, Steve Nash
Mid Subject or team contributes to the total subject of the NBA WikiProject. Subject may not necessarily be famous. Miami Heat, Utah Jazz
Low Subject or team is not particularly notable or significant even within the field of the NBA, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. None at this time. Please request assessment below to determine importance of articles.

[edit] Requests for 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.

Add articles here! Newest requests on the BOTTOM, please.

  1. I would like to request assessment of all team articles for the importances (top, high, mid, low) Thanks! Thisisborin9talk|contribs 05:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Y Done Taken care of. Thisisborin9talk|contribs 04:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
2. I would like to request assessment of the page Pau Gasol for quality and importance. Thanks! Gamloverks (talk) 01:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Y Done <<GA/Mid>> Cheers, Thisisborin9sign here! 23:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NBA articles by quality statistics

NBA
articles
Importance
Top High Mid Low None Total
Quality
Featured article FA 3 2 5
Featured list FL 1 3 2 6
A 1 1
Good article GA 2 1 2 20 25
B 3 19 46 11 6 85
Start 27 131 189 127 474
Stub 11 6 91 66 174
List 1 1 33 66 71 172
Assessed 7 64 217 362 292 942
Total 7 64 217 362 292 942

[edit] NBA articles by quality log

Archive This is a log of operations by a bot. The contents of this page are unlikely to need human editing. In particular, links should not be disambiguated as this is a historical record.


[edit] June 11, 2008

[edit] June 8, 2008

[edit] June 5, 2008

[edit] June 2, 2008

[edit] May 29, 2008

[edit] May 26, 2008

[edit] May 22, 2008

[edit] May 19, 2008

[edit] May 14, 2008

[edit] May 12, 2008

[edit] May 6, 2008

[edit] May 5, 2008

[edit] April 29, 2008

[edit] April 23, 2008

[edit] April 22, 2008

[edit] April 16, 2008

[edit] April 13, 2008

[edit] April 6, 2008

[edit] April 2, 2008

[edit] March 27, 2008

[edit] March 22, 2008

[edit] March 18, 2008

(No changes today)

[edit] March 15, 2008

[edit] March 11, 2008

[edit] March 9, 2008

[edit] March 3, 2008