Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Bible/Biblical criticism work group/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the assessment department of the Biblical Criticism WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles on biblical criticism. The article ratings are used within the project 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 Biblical Criticism}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:biblical criticism articles by quality and Category:biblical criticism articles by importance, which can then be seen in the #Current status section below.

Frequently asked questions

[edit]
How can I get an article rated?
Do it yourself or list it in the section for assessment requests below.
On what basis are assessments made?
Criteria for importance is described in #Importance scale. We have not established project-specific criteria for quality, so we use Template:Grading scheme and Template:Assessment Class Summary.
Who can assess articles?
Any Wikipedia contributor
Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments?
Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, we are unable to leave detailed comments in most cases. If you have particular questions, you might ask the person who assessed the article; they will usually be happy to provide you with their reasoning.
What if I don't agree with a rating?
Change it or discuss it in the article talk page.
Where are articles needing assessment?
At Category:Unassessed biblical criticism articles and in the #Requesting an assessment section below.

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

Instructions

[edit]

Importance scale

[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the criticism-importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Bible}} project banner on its talk page, like this:

{{WikiProject Bible|class=|importance=|criticism=yes|criticism-importance=}}

Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Top The article is one of the core topics about Biblical Criticism. Generally, this is limited to those articles that are included as sections of the main Biblical criticism article. A reader who is not involved in the field of Biblical Criticism will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily. Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages. Biblical Criticism
High The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding Biblical Criticism.
Mid The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in the history of Biblical Criticism. Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject. Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand Biblical Criticism. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text. Most people involved in Biblical Criticism will be rated in this level.
Low The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of Biblical Criticism. Few readers outside the Biblical Criticism field or that are not adherents to Biblical Criticism may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article. Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of Biblical Criticism, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed. Topics included at this level include most practices and infrastructure of Biblical Criticism.

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!

Edit this section and place request here:

Current status

[edit]
  • 10.5% List-Class
  • 10.5% Stub-Class
  • 26.3% Start-Class
  • 47.4% C-Class
  • 5.3% B-Class
The following table is convenient for determining priority articles and overall project coverage, but is maintained by the WP_1.0_bot, which is poorly maintained and updates the table only unreliably. Articles by Quality and Importance The following are updated nearly immediately.
Biblical criticism
articles
Importance Refresh
 Top   High   Mid   Low  ???  Total
Quality  FA 0 0 0 0 0 0
 A 0 0 0 0 0 0
 GA 0 0 0 0 0 0
B 0 0 0 0 0 1
C 0 0 0 0 0 9
Start 0 0 0 0 0 5
Stub 0 0 0 0 0 2
 FL 0 0 0 0 0 0
List 0 0 0 0 0 2
??? 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 2 0 5 10 2 19
 Top  High  Mid  Low  NA  ??? Total
 2  0  5  10  3 2  22 
 FA A GABCStartStub FLListCategoryDisambigFilePortalProjectRedirectTemplateNA???Total
00019520200000030022

Assessment log

[edit]
Biblical Criticism articles:
Index · Statistics · Log

November 17, 2012

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

September 24, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 12, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

May 2, 2012

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

April 25, 2012

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

April 22, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]
  • David Strauss (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).
  • Morton Smith (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

April 19, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

April 18, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

April 9, 2012

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

January 5, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 1, 2011

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

May 29, 2011

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

May 3, 2011

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

April 27, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

April 23, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

February 13, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

January 29, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

January 24, 2011

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

December 13, 2010

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

October 14, 2010

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

September 26, 2010

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

September 24, 2010

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

September 21, 2010

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]
  • Ormulum (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as FA-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Low-Class (rev · t).

March 25, 2010

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

January 8, 2010

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

January 7, 2010

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

December 9, 2009

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

December 8, 2009

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

November 17, 2012

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

September 24, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 12, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

May 2, 2012

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

April 25, 2012

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

April 22, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]
  • David Strauss (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).
  • Morton Smith (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Unknown-Class (rev · t).

April 19, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

April 18, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

April 9, 2012

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

January 5, 2012

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 1, 2011

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

May 29, 2011

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

May 3, 2011

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

April 27, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

April 23, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

February 13, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

January 29, 2011

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

January 24, 2011

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

December 13, 2010

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

October 14, 2010

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

September 26, 2010

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

September 24, 2010

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

September 21, 2010

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]
  • Ormulum (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as FA-Class (rev · t). Importance assessed as Low-Class (rev · t).

March 25, 2010

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

January 21, 2010

[edit]
(No changes today)

January 13, 2010

[edit]

January 7, 2010

[edit]
(No changes today)

December 30, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

December 22, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

December 17, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

December 10, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

December 6, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

December 1, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

November 25, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

November 21, 2009

[edit]

November 16, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

November 12, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

November 8, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

November 4, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

October 26, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

October 21, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

October 17, 2009

[edit]

October 12, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

October 3, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

September 30, 2009

[edit]

September 25, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

September 21, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

September 17, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

September 14, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

September 9, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

September 4, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

August 29, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

August 24, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

August 19, 2009

[edit]
(No changes today)

August 14, 2009

[edit]

August 10, 2009

[edit]