Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Zealand/Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The table at the top of the Instructions section doesn't seem to change dynamically. How often is it regenerated? THere should probably be a note as to frequency and last accurate date. dramatic 19:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've noticed this too. However, it does change, but I don't know how it works! sorry--Nengscoz416 (talk) 23:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- I gather it's updated automatically every three days by WP 1.0 bot, although you can also request an immediate update here. -- Avenue (talk) 12:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- ah ha, the bot updates it every 3 - 10 days but if you want an instantaneous result, click the above link and type New Zealand in the gap. --Nengscoz416 (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
- I gather it's updated automatically every three days by WP 1.0 bot, although you can also request an immediate update here. -- Avenue (talk) 12:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Assessing importance
Are there more specific guidelines available than those on the project page? I'm particularly interested in assessing the importance of geographical articles.
My suggestion is that places with less than 1,000 people have a default assessment of low class; those with 1,000-10,000 have medium class; those of 10,000-100,000 have high class, and those over 100,000 people have top class. Special events or considerations may bump an article up a class; Queenstown, New Zealand is more important than its population may suggest, although since it just makes it over the 10,000 mark maybe high class is correct. Aramoana has a tiny population, but the 1990 massacre makes it medium class. Waitangi, Northland also has a tiny population, but it was the site of a very major historical event, and it is a focus of the news once a year on Waitangi Day. It might go up two classes, to high class.
Does this make any sense? Have any other wikiprojects spelled out the assessment criteria like this?-gadfium 07:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- That might not be a bad starting point, although I agree population alone isn't always enough to go on. For example, Milford Sound has a low population, but is moderately important, while in contrast Manukau has a huge population but is currently rated low (which doesn't seem appropriate; in my view it should be high, but not top). I've often been classifying our articles on the quality scale only, because the importance scale seems so vague.
- The only other project I've done a fair bit of assessment for is the volcanoes project. It has pretty extensive guidelines here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Volcanoes/Assessment#Importance_scale. -- Avenue (talk) 08:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- I agree that cities such as Manukau which have high populations but are part of a greater metropolitan area should be "high" not "top" importance. I've upgraded Manukau based on this discussion.-gadfium 19:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- A rule of thumb I use is (10 * number of interlanguage links) + (number articles under "what links here")
<20 low, <100 medium, <500 high. XLerate (talk) 11:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Class=?
Greetings - having gone from a messy wreck article last night noticed a lot of cats are not tagged - went for a foray and am a bit concerned - is it class=cat or class=NA for the NZ project? It would be good to get an answer from those who do it - cheers SatuSuro 04:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- I haven't classified any category articles, but it appears that they are class=NA. See Category:Non-article New Zealand pages.-gadfium 04:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
