Wikipedia:WikiProject Neurology/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quality: FA-Class | A Class | GA-Class | B-Class | Start-Class | Stub Class | Unassessed Importance: Top | High | Mid | Low

WikiProject
Neurology
Navigation:
Project page talk
Portal talk
Style guideline talk
Articles by Class talk
Articles by Priority talk
Open task talk
Related projects:
Medicine talk
Dentistry talk
Neuroscience talk
Veterin. medicine talk
edit · changes

Welcome to the assessment department of the Neurology WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's medicine articles.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Neurology}} banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Neurology articles by quality and Category:Neurology articles by importance.

All articles under neurology project should try to adhere to Manual of Style (medicine-related articles). An article is unlikely to attract a grade above B class if it does not conform to style guideline. A Featured Article is the highest possible assessment, and requires a community consensus demonstrated at Featured Article Candidates per the guidelines of What Is a Featured Article?. An A-Class Article is very well-written, nearly comprehensive and approaching excellence, but may still need minor edits and adjustments.

Contents

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How can I get my article rated? 
List it in the requesting an assessment section below.
Who can assess articles? 
Any member of WikiProject Neurology is free to add—or change—the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
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? 
Contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Neurology who will handle it or assign the issue to someone. You may also list it for a Peer review.
What if I don't agree with a rating? 
Relist it as a request or contact the project.
Aren't the ratings subjective? 
Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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 on the discussion page for this department, or to contact the Wikipedia:WikiProject Neurology directly.

[edit] Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the parameters in the {{WikiProject Neurology}} banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in [[:Category:Unassessed-Class neurology articles]]. Feel free to go and assess these yourself if you are a member of the group. === Syntax === You can learn the syntax by looking at the talk pages in edit mode and by reading the info below. This is the rating syntax (ratings are samples, change to what applies to the article in question): ; <nowiki>{{WikiProject Neurology}} or {{WikiProject Neurology|class=|importance=}}

  • Displays the default banner, showing the project info and only ??? for the quality and importance parameters.
{{WikiProject Neurology|class=A|importance=Top}}
  • Classed A with Top priority. All assessed articles should have quality and importance filled in.

[edit] Quality assessment

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

{{WikiProject Neurology| ... | class=??? | ...}}

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

[edit] Priority assessment

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

{{WikiProject Neurology| ... | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

[edit] Optional parameters

{{WikiProject Neurology| ... | nested=???| ...}}
{{WikiProject Neurology| ... | auto=???| ...}}
  • yes (This parameter is for the use of bots which are auto-assessing articles which contain stub templates as Stub-Class. It populates Category:WikiProject Neurology automatically assessed articles.)

[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. Cerebellum
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. Chemical synapse
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. Subarachnoid hemorrhage
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. Medulla oblongata
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. Glossopharyngeal nerve
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. Fourth ventricle


[edit] Importance scale

The purpose of the importance rating is to direct the project's article improvement efforts towards the most important articles, and incidentally to provide a convenient shortlist of important topics for readers who are interested in neurology generally.

All diseases, conditions, medications, and tests are of "top" importance to people who are directly affected by them. 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 that the average reader of Wikipedia will 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 that are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to a student, expert or patient.

WikiProject Neurology's specific guidelines for importance ratings are provided below. In making an assessment, it is often helpful to compare the article with others that already have the proposed rating. Links to each category are provided in the first column of this table:

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top priority Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to neurology. Strong interest from non-professionals around the world. Usually a large subject with many associated sub-articles. Less than 1% of neurology-related articles achieve this rating. Cerebellum or Multiple sclerosis
High priority Subject is clearly notable. Subject is interesting to, or directly affects, many average readers. This category includes the most common diseases and treatments as well as major areas of specialization. Fewer than 10% of neurology-related articles achieve this rating. Coeliac disease or Mastectomy
Mid priority Normal priority for article improvement. A good article would be interesting or useful to many readers. Subject is notable within its particular specialty. This category includes most neurological conditions, tests, approved drugs, neurological subspecialties, well-known anatomy, and common signs and symptoms. Cholangiocarcinoma or Cramp
Low priority Article may only be included to cover a specific part of a more important article, or may be only loosely connected to medicine. Subject may be specific to one country or part of one country, such as licensing requirements or organizations. This category includes most of the following: very rare diseases, lesser-known medical signs, equipment, hospitals, individuals, historical information, publications, laws, investigational drugs, detailed genetic and physiological information, and obscure anatomical features. Leopard syndrome or Flynn effect
Unknown This label is used for all pages that are not articles, such as templates, categories, and disambiguation pages. (To mark an article as unknown, simply leave the importance parameter empty, like this: |importance= ) WikiProject Neurology

[edit] Requesting an assessment or re-assessment

If you have made significant changes to an article please feel free to list it below. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, contact Project members or enlist it to Peer review instead.

Add articles here! Newest requests on the BOTTOM