Wikipedia:WikiProject Academic Journals/Assessment
|
Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Academic Journals. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Academic Journals related articles. 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 recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.
Category:Academic Journal articles by quality serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPJournals}} project banner. Filling in a rating in the class parameter of the {{WPJournals}} template on the talk page of an article causes the name of that article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Academic Journal articles by quality.
The following system is based on the general criteria for assessing how close we are to a distribution-quality article on a particular topic. The system is based on a letter scheme which reflects principally how complete the article is, though the content and language quality are also factors. Once an article reaches the A-Class, it is considered "complete", although edits will continue to be made.
Frequently asked questions
[edit]- How can I get an article rated?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- Who can assess articles?
- Any member of the Academic Journals WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
- What if I don't agree with a rating?
- You can list it in the section for assessment requests below, and someone will take a look at it. Alternately, you can ask any member of the project to rate the article again.
- Aren't the ratings subjective?
- Yes, they are, 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 them on the discussion page for this department.
Instructions on how to assess an Academic Journal article
[edit]An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPJournals}} project banner on the article's talk page. Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Academic Journal articles. At present, there are almost 800 Academic Journal articles that need assessment (e.g., that need to have a class inserted in the class parameter of the {{WPJournals}} template).
Academic Journal articles to be assessed have some aspects of the {{WPJournals}} template on their talk page, but the template may be incomplete. Select an article from the list at Category:Unassessed Academic Journal articles. Then, look over the article in anticipation of filling out the parameters of the {{WPJournals}} template. Finally, add in the proper parameters to the talk page template, as outlined below.
Class parameter
[edit]The following values may be used for the class parameter:
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Academic Journal articles)
- FL(adds articles to Category:FL-Class Academic Journal articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Academic Journal articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Academic Journal articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Academic Journal articles)
- C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Academic Journal articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Academic Journal articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Academic Journal articles)
- List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Academic Journal articles)
- Disambig (for use on disambiguation pages)
- Template (for use on template pages; see example)
- Category (for use on category pages)
- Redirect ( for use on pages redirecting to articles)
- File (for use on file pages – generally cover or logo images)
- NA (for pages where assessment is unnecessary, such as redirects to non-article pages; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Academic Journal articles)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Academic Journal articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
Two levels, GA and FA, are not assessments that can be assigned simply by a project member. These refer to external judgments of article quality made at WP:GA and WP:FA. If these tags are desired, and the article meets the criteria (for GA or FA), it must be nominated (for GA or FA) and await comments.
It is vital that people do not take these assessments personally. It is understood that we all have different priorities and different opinions about what makes a perfect article. Generally an active project will develop a consensus, though be aware that different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area, such as this. Many projects have an assessment team. If you contribute a lot of content to an article you may request an independent assessment.
Quality scale
[edit]Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|
FA | The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured article criteria:
A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.
|
Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | Currently none (as of August 2009) |
FL | The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
|
Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | Currently none (as of August 2009) |
A | The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria
The article meets the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history). |
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help. | Currently none (as of August 2009) |
GA | The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria
A good article is:
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. | Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. | The Accounting Review (as of August 2014) |
B | The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria
|
Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. | A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. | Genes, Brain and Behavior (as of August 2009) |
C | The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
|
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. | Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems. | PLoS ONE (as of August 2009) |
Start | An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
|
Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. | Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. | Aquatic Botany (as of August 2009) |
Stub | A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. | Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant. | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. | BioTechniques (as of August 2009) |
List | Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area. | There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader. | Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized. | List of scientific journals (as of August 2009) |
Requesting an assessment
[edit]If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new quality rating for it, please feel free to list it below. Note: This is only to rate the article on quality - you may or may not get feedback on the article. If you desire a review, use the peer review process. If you assess an article, please remove it so that other editors will not waste time reviewing the same articles. Thanks!
Articles submitted here will not be rated above 'B'; see Wikipedia:Good articles and Wikipedia:Featured articles for higher assessments.
Edit this section and place request here:
- Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology
- The Burlington Magazine
- FEBS Letters
- International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management
- Hastings West-Northwest Journal of Environmental Law and Policy
- The Urban Lawyer
- Journal of Huntington's Disease
- World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
- Author-level metrics
- Draft:Journal of Applied Horticulture
- Review article
Current status
[edit]FA | A | GA | B | C | Start | Stub | FL | List | Category | Disambig | Draft | File | Portal | Project | Redirect | Template | NA | ??? | Total |
1 | 0 | 10 | 67 | 394 | 3,461 | 7,079 | 0 | 117 | 1,896 | 126 | 69 | 4,366 | 0 | 58 | 17,474 | 183 | 45 | 0 | 35,346 |
Articles assessed for quality: 100% complete | |
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. |
- 1.1% List-Class
- 63.6% Stub-Class
- 31.1% Start-Class
- 3.5% C-Class
- 0.6% B-Class
- 0.1% GA-Class
- 0% FA-Class
Assessment log
[edit]- The logs in this section are generated automatically; please don't add entries to them by hand.
Unexpected changes, such as downgrading or raising an article more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.
December 5, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]Assessed
[edit]- Al-Daie (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t)
- File:State Security Bulletin cover.webp (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as File-Class. (rev · t)
December 4, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- Category:Infobox journals with missing MEDLINE abbreviations (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Category-Class to Redirect-Class. (rev · t)
December 2, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- The Chinese Journal of International Politics (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Boletín de la Real Academia Española (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Boletín de la Real Academia de la Historia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t)
December 1, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- Open Journal Systems (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- The Urban Lawyer (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Natural Language Processing (journal) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t)
November 30, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- BIOSIS Previews (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
[edit]- Acrasis kona (talk) removed.
November 29, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]Assessed
[edit]- Acrasis kona (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t)
- Natural Language Processing (Journal) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
Popular pages
[edit]- Popular pages: List of top articles with the most frequent views, updated monthly.