Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's History/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The WikiProject Women's History assessment system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in its subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. The ratings are also used by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content.

In general, anyone can add or change an article's rating. However, the "GA" and "FA" labels should only be used on articles that have been reviewed and are currently designated as good articles or featured articles, respectively.

In addition to assessing article quality, for which there are generally accepted article assessment criteria, we can also assess articles for their importance in Women's History. Importance is always somewhat subjective and will vary from project to project, so that an article may be of top importance to one project but of low importance to another, regardless of its quality.

To assess an article, consult the standards below; once you have chosen the level that seems to be closest to the article, set the class parameter in the WikiProject banner template to the level's name (omitting "Class" from the end). For example, to rate an article as "B-Class", use |class=B in the banner. Again, the "FA" and "GA" labels should not be added to articles unless they are currently designated as such.

Current status

[edit]

All the articles which have been assessed by this project can be found here.

Articles needing assessment

[edit]

The following articles need assessment! Please take a look and assess them according to the criteria below.

Assessment standards

[edit]

WikiProject Women's History recommends the following guidelines for assessing an article's importance to the project once it has met the criteria for inclusion under the project's banner. To ask questions or suggest changes, please join the discussion at the project's talk page.

WikiProject Women's History uses the same criteria for grading articles as those set out by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, as described below. (The examples given are general, and not specific to the project.)