Wikipedia:WikiProject Law/Assessment: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:57, 19 September 2011

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Law! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about the law and legal system. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

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

Frequently asked questions

How do I add an article to the WikiProject?: Just add {{WikiProject Law}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
How can I get my article rated?: Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles?: Any editor, or member of the Law WikiProject is free to add a rating to an article if they wish. However, the Assessment Team (from this department) may overrule the rating of an article if they see fit.
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!
Did the reviewer leave any comments?: If the reviewer leaves a comment, it will be found on the talk page of the article.
Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments?: Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, you may not receive detailed comments in all instances. If this is the case, you might ask the person who assessed the article if you have any particular questions; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
To what extent will the Assessment Dept. give feedback on an article after grading it?: If you wish, the Assessment Dept. (for WikiProject Law) will attempt to keep giving feedback until the Assessment Dept. believes that the article in question is at least; slightly above a "B" grade. After reaching this stage, the Assessment Team are likely to recommend that your article be peer-reviewed.
How can I keep track of changes in article ratings?: A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the statistics may be more accessible.
How does this all work?: See Using the bot and WikiProject Council Guide.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

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, please use the Wikipedia:Peer review instead. Completed requests are usually placed in the archive.

Please place new requests (in the format, # [[article name]] -- ~~~~ ) at the bottom of the list.

J.D. -- Zoticogrillo (talk) 05:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SCO-Linux controversies -- should be checked for neutrality and legal accuracy. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Inslaw -- request legal opinion on accuracy of article in reference to final determination of Inslaw Inc. v. United States Government Anne Teedham (talk) 14:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Court of Common Pleas (England); request a re-assessment after I massively expanded and referenced it. Any help available to push it to GA would be appreciated; I think it can get there :). Ironho lds 00:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speed limits in the United States --unassessed by this project Synchronism (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speed limit --completely unassessed Synchronism (talk) 03:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lawsuits to Overturn Proposition 8 --unassessed --Joe Decker (talk) 06:16, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
John Ordronaux (doctor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). This is an interesting one that I have been helping a new, but very talented, editor write. My input has been on the technical aspects - linking, refs etc. It is, I think, clearly C class, but we would like to get it up to at least B class. Requesting a review from the Project. Thank you. – ukexpat (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gorgoroth name dispute -- documents the name dispute concerning the black metal band Gorgoroth which set a legal precedent in Norway Dark Prime (talk) 00:12, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
King_Kong_defence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) -- The talk page (linked from "start class articles") is now an orphan because the content of King Kong defence has been merged into the Pirate Bay Trial. Should be de-listed from start-class articles since it is no longer an article. FrumpyTheClown (talk) 05:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In re: Gill -- Viciouslies (talk) 21:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Common Heritage of Mankind -- NimbusWeb (talk) 09:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. -- Agreatnotion (talk) 17:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Cousin marriage Currently a dispute between the main author and myself about what to rate it. See project talk page for more info. Cdtew (talk) 23:16, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did a longer translation of Roermond witch trial. Please reassess. Discworldian (talk) 17:00, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Standard State Zoning Enabling Act - added some information from the American Planning Association and new links to expanded articles. Requesting upgrade from Stub to Start. Wikihelper68 (talk) 00:22, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sociology of law I have expanded, revised and structured the entry on the Sociology of law. Please reassess it.
Tucker v. Texas I have significantly revised the article and structure. Please reassess. GregJackP Boomer! 18:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Appropriate adult I have revised and added references to this article, please reassess. Hopefully gone from stub to at least start class Xmp (talk) 00:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act of 2004 TheNgeveld 14:41, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
R v Brownhouse -- Stellas4lunch (talk) 23:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC) )[reply]
money laundering -- lots of changes since last assessed (I think) Thanks! high importance Wiki33139 (talk) 15:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Law}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Law
|class= 
|importance= 
|attention= 
|needs-infobox= 
|peer-review= 
|old-peer-review= 
}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class legal articles)
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class legal articles)
GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class legal articles)
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class legal articles)
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class legal articles)
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class legal articles)
NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class legal articles)

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

Quality scale

Please note that the WikiProject Law Assessment Department is in the process of updating the grading scheme, so changes may occur to the criteria and examples - the assessment department apologizes for any inconvenience caused, and endeavours to complete this task as soon as possible. Upon completion of updating, the main member of the assessment department will remove this notice.

Template:WP Law Grading scheme

Importance assessment

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

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

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 the English 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 the law.

Further, generally notability should not be limited to the perspective of editor demographics, or one jurisdiction or country. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a common law audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated. Generally, articles on the topic in one country should have the same importance rating as an equivalent topic in another country. For example, an article on criminal law in Canada, Germany, or China should receive the same importance rating as an article on criminal law in the US.

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

Status	Template	Meaning of Status
Top	{{Top-Class}}	This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information. The article is about one of the core legal topics. Adds articles to Category:Top-importance legal articles
High	{{High-Class}}	This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge. The article is about the most well-known or historically significant aspects of the law. Adds articles to Category:High-importance legal articles.
Mid	{{Mid-Class}}	This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas. The article is about a topic within the legal field that may or may not be commonly known outside the profession. Adds articles to Category:Mid-importance legal articles.
Low	{{Low-Class}}	This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia. The article is about a topic that is highly specialised within the field of legal studies and is not generally common knowledge to lay people. Adds articles to Category:Low-importance legal articles.
None	None	This article has yet to be rated.

Assessment Team

The list of members below make up the WikiProject Law Assessment team. Members of the team who are bolded (below) are currently the main, active member(s) of the assessment team - they are most likely to assess articles, so please direct any enquiries regarding assessment or the assessment department towards them.

Ncmvocalist (talk · contribs) - maintenance of assessment dept. and currently, main member of assessment team

New members

If you would like to join the assessment team, please add your name below.

Tarun2k (talk · contribs) (special interest: tax laws, indian laws
EECavazos (talk · contribs)
Bearian (talk · contribs) tagging and improving all law stubs

Example assessments

Legal articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
Quality	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA		1	2	3			6
FL			1	2			3
GA		4	8	10			22
B	15	33	64	40		79	231
C	9	55	75	157		105	401
Start	44	143	307	890	1	352	1,737
Stub	2	21	110	391		111	635
List		2	4	39	5	42	92
Category					44		44
Disambig					3		3
Redirect				2	4		6
Template					18		18
NA			1		1		2
Assessed	70	259	572	1,534	76	689	3,200
Total	70	259	572	1,534	76	689	3,200

To assess an article, paste one of the following onto the article's talk page.

Quality

{{WikiProject Law|class=FA}} - to rate an article at FA-Class
{{WikiProject Law|class=A}} - to rate an article at A-Class
{{WikiProject Law|class=GA}} - to rate an article at GA-Class
{{WikiProject Law|class=B}} - to rate an article at B-Class
{{WikiProject Law|class=Start}} - to rate an article at Start-Class
{{WikiProject Law|class=Stub}} - to rate an article at Stub-Class
{{WikiProject Law}} - to leave the article un-assessed.

Importance

{{WikiProject Law|importance=Top}} - to rate an article at Top importance
{{WikiProject Law|importance=High}} - to rate an article at High importance
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Mid}} - to rate an article at Mid importance
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Low}} - to rate an article at Low importance

Log

The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available here. Unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 # [[Western Shoshone Claims Distribution Act of 2004]] [[User_talk:Thengeveld|<font face="tempus sans ITC" color="DarkGreen"> '''''TheNgeveld''''' </font>]]  14:41, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 # [[R v Brownhouse]] -- [[User:Stellas4lunch|Stellas4lunch]] ([[User talk:Stellas4lunch|talk]]) 23:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC) )
+# [[money laundering]] -- lots of changes since last assessed (I think)  Thanks! high importance [[User:Wiki33139|Wiki33139]] ([[User talk:Wiki33139|talk]]) 15:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 == Instructions ==