Welcome to the assessment page of WikiProject Anti-war! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about anti-war topics. 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.
The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{ WikiProject Anti-war}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Anti-war articles by quality.
- How can I get my article rated?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- Who can assess articles?
- Anyone 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.
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{ WikiProject Anti-war}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Anti-war
|class=
|importance=
}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter, note capital letters are essential for proper categories!
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Anti-war articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Anti-war articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Anti-war articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Anti-war articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Anti-war articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Anti-war articles)
- NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article Anti-war pages)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Anti-war articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
The following values may be used for the importance parameter:
- Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Anti-war articles)
- High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Anti-war articles)
- Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Anti-war articles)
- Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Anti-war articles)
Articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Anti-war articles. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.
Quality scale
| 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. under discussion |
Cleopatra (as of June 2018) |
|
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. |
List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
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. |
Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014) |
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. |
Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019) |
| 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. |
Psychology (as of January 2024) |
| 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. |
Wing (as of June 2018) |
| 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. |
Ball (as of September 2014) |
| 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. |
Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014) |
| 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 literary movements |
Importance scale
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 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 people reading the articles.
Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.
| 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. |
| High | {{ High-Class}} | This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge. |
| Mid | {{ Mid-Class}} | This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas. |
| 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. |
| None | None | This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed. |
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.
- Campus Antiwar Network (just finished making a large revision to the article)
- Protest song (still needs more work on very early and international protest songs, but it's currently rated as stub, which is well off)
- Another Mother For Peace new, referenced article
- Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament - Has not received a rating on the importance scale.
- Chicago Seven - updated December, 2020
Welcome to the assessment page of WikiProject Anti-war! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about anti-war topics. 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.
The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{ WikiProject Anti-war}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Anti-war articles by quality.
- How can I get my article rated?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- Who can assess articles?
- Anyone 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.
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{ WikiProject Anti-war}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Anti-war
|class=
|importance=
}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter, note capital letters are essential for proper categories!
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Anti-war articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Anti-war articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Anti-war articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Anti-war articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Anti-war articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Anti-war articles)
- NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:Non-article Anti-war pages)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Anti-war articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
The following values may be used for the importance parameter:
- Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Anti-war articles)
- High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Anti-war articles)
- Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Anti-war articles)
- Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Anti-war articles)
Articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Anti-war articles. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.
Quality scale
| 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. under discussion |
Cleopatra (as of June 2018) |
|
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. |
List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
|
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. |
Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014) |
|
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. |
Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019) |
| 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. |
Psychology (as of January 2024) |
| 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. |
Wing (as of June 2018) |
| 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. |
Ball (as of September 2014) |
| 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. |
Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014) |
| 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 literary movements |
Importance scale
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 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 people reading the articles.
Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.
| 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. |
| High | {{ High-Class}} | This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge. |
| Mid | {{ Mid-Class}} | This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas. |
| 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. |
| None | None | This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed. |
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.
- Campus Antiwar Network (just finished making a large revision to the article)
- Protest song (still needs more work on very early and international protest songs, but it's currently rated as stub, which is well off)
- Another Mother For Peace new, referenced article
- Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament - Has not received a rating on the importance scale.
- Chicago Seven - updated December, 2020