Wikipedia:WikiProject King Arthur/Importance
This page is being created to assist the members of this project in determining which importance level will be applied to which articles. Two general sections will be found below:
- (1) A general discussion of what kind of article (related book or other work, major character, minor character, etc.) will be generally given which level of importance, and
- (2) Specific discussions regarding the importance level of individual articles.
Please make suggestions for general levels of importance and specific articles below.
Importance by type of article
[edit]How are we assigning importance to categories? How about lists? Do they get an importance rating like actual articles, or is there some other way to make them something other than the default "Unknown-importance"? — AnnaKucsma (Talk to me!) 14:19, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I acknowledge that my phrasing may have been poor here. What might be a better way to say it is that we might assign a certain standard priority level to articles of a certain non-wikipedia type "category", like maybe "major characters", "authors of the most significant books dealing with the subject", "lesser Knights of the Round Table", "French novels dealing with the Matter of Britain", "movie adaptations", "operas and other major works of music", etc., etc. There is a similar kind of breakdown of types of articles on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject James Bond#Importance Tags that I was thinking of when I said that, although I acknowledge that my phrasing was clearly far from transparent. John Carter 14:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, what I meant was the Wikipedia-type categories, like Category:Arthurian film and television or Category:Arthurian literature. As an afterthought, I decided to ask about lists as well, such as List of legendary kings of Britain. (The appropriate quality-assesment categories are Category:Category-Class King Arthur pages and Category:List-Class King Arthur pages.) — AnnaKucsma (Talk to me!) 15:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think there was ever any intention to apply importance rankings to Categories per se. Actually, that would be kind of impossible, as it would depend upon which articles are included in the category, and that can and does change without notice. John Carter 15:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, is there a way to keep categories from appearing unassessed? — AnnaKucsma (Talk to me!) 16:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe the categories themselves might qualify as "Low" importance. That might work. I would hesitate to give them, considering their relative lack of content, anything higher. John Carter 16:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, is there a way to keep categories from appearing unassessed? — AnnaKucsma (Talk to me!) 16:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think there was ever any intention to apply importance rankings to Categories per se. Actually, that would be kind of impossible, as it would depend upon which articles are included in the category, and that can and does change without notice. John Carter 15:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, what I meant was the Wikipedia-type categories, like Category:Arthurian film and television or Category:Arthurian literature. As an afterthought, I decided to ask about lists as well, such as List of legendary kings of Britain. (The appropriate quality-assesment categories are Category:Category-Class King Arthur pages and Category:List-Class King Arthur pages.) — AnnaKucsma (Talk to me!) 15:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)