Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Government/Assessment
Welcome to the assessment department of the United States Government WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's U.S. Government-related articles. Much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, but 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 United States|USGov=|USGov-importance=}}
talk page project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:United States Government articles by quality and Category:United States Government articles by importance, which serve as the sources for an automatically generated worklist.
Instructions
[edit]Quality assessment
[edit]An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject United States}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):
FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class United States Government articles) | FA | |
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class United States Government articles) | A | |
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class United States Government articles) | GA | |
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class United States Government articles) | B | |
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class United States Government articles) | C | |
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class United States Government articles) | Start | |
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class United States Government articles) | Stub | |
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class United States Government articles) | FL | |
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class United States Government articles) | List |
For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:
Importance assessment
[edit]An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject United States}} project banner on its talk page:
The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):
Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance United States Government articles) | Top | |
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance United States Government articles) | High | |
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance United States Government articles) | Mid | |
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance United States Government articles) | Low | |
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance United States Government articles) | NA | |
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance United States Government articles) | ??? |
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. | 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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
FM | Pictures that have attained featured picture status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. More detailed criteria
A featured picture:
|
The page contains a featured image, sound clip or other media-related content. | Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. | File:American World War II senior military officials, 1945.JPEG (as of January 2012) |
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 |
Future | A topic about which details are subject to change often. More detailed criteria
The article covers a future topic of which no broadcast version exists so far and all information is subject to change when new information arises from reliable sources. With multiple reliable sources, there might be information that contradicts other information in the same or other articles. Not all future categories will be rated with "Future" and may be rated like normal.
|
Amount of meaningful content varies over time as the projected event draws near. | Material added might be speculation and should be carefully sourced. | Kampala Southern Bypass Highway |
Category | Any category falls under this class. | Categories are mainly used to group together articles within a particular subject area. | Large categories may need to be split into one or more subcategories. Be wary of articles that have been miscategorized. | Category:Software |
Disambig | Any disambiguation page falls under this class. | The page serves to distinguish multiple articles that share the same (or similar) title. | Additions should be made as new articles of that name are created. Pay close attention to the proper naming of such pages, as they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title. | Apple (disambiguation) |
File | Any page in the file namespace falls under this class. | The page contains an image, a sound clip or other media-related content. | Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. | File:Musk Lorikeet jul08.jpg |
Portal | Any page in the portal namespace falls under this class. | Portals are intended to serve as "main pages" for specific topics. | Editor involvement is essential to ensure that portals are kept up to date. | Portal:Science |
Project | All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class. | Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development. | Develop these pages into collaborative resources that are useful for improving articles within the project. | Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history |
Redirect | Any redirect falls under this class. | The page redirects to another article with a similar name, related topic or that has been merged with the original article at this location. | Editor involvement is essential to ensure that articles are not mis-classified as redirects, and that redirects are not mis-classified as articles. | Wikipedia:5P |
Template | Any template falls under this class. The most common types of templates include infoboxes and navboxes. | Different types of templates serve different purposes. Infoboxes provide easy access to key pieces of information about the subject. Navboxes are for the purpose of grouping together related subjects into an easily accessible format, to assist the user in navigating between articles. | Infoboxes are typically placed at the upper right of an article, while navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page. Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information. | Template:Martial arts |
NA | Any non-article page that fits no other classification. | The page contains no article content. | Look out for misclassified articles. Currently, many NA-class articles may need to be re-classified. | |
??? | Article quality has not yet been assessed. | Articles for which a valid quality rating has not yet been provided are listed in this category. | A quality parameter should be assigned according to the assessment department of the WikiProject. |
Importance scale
[edit]Importance | Criteria | Example |
---|---|---|
Top | Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field. | Kindergarten |
High | Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Factory Acts |
Mid | Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | 0.999... |
Low | Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. | G cell |
NA | Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. | Category:Palms |
??? | Subject importance has not yet been assessed. |
Statistics
[edit]Current status
[edit]United States Government articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
FA | 2 | 13 | 13 | 33 | 4 | 65 | |
FL | 1 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 12 | |
FM | 230 | 230 | |||||
A | 4 | 4 | |||||
GA | 2 | 13 | 34 | 94 | 12 | 155 | |
B | 13 | 98 | 128 | 335 | 1 | 117 | 692 |
C | 19 | 108 | 276 | 986 | 4 | 427 | 1,820 |
Start | 3 | 67 | 318 | 3,154 | 23 | 998 | 4,563 |
Stub | 9 | 70 | 2,799 | 15 | 520 | 3,413 | |
List | 3 | 11 | 54 | 1,272 | 6 | 378 | 1,724 |
Category | 2,635 | 2,635 | |||||
Disambig | 23 | 23 | |||||
File | 162 | 162 | |||||
Project | 19 | 19 | |||||
Redirect | 2 | 16 | 236 | 5,320 | 5,574 | ||
Template | 2,606 | 2,606 | |||||
NA | 38 | 38 | |||||
Other | 17 | 17 | |||||
Assessed | 43 | 322 | 913 | 8,917 | 11,099 | 2,458 | 23,752 |
Unassessed | 40 | 1 | 87 | 128 | |||
Total | 43 | 322 | 913 | 8,957 | 11,100 | 2,545 | 23,880 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 52,963 | Ω = 4.94 |
Requesting an assessment
[edit]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 at the bottom of the list. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the peer review department instead.
To assess an article, simply update the Novels WikiProject template on the article's talk page. Please also strike out the request on this page by using the <s>Strike-through text</s> command and add a rationale for your assessment. Don't forget to sign your username after your comment using ~~~~.
- This article was very short and limited in scope when it was first created, but I've been doing a lot of work to expand it. It's a pesticide poisoning surveillance program run by NIOSH-CDC. I put it under the US Government and Medicine projects. I've rated it as C-class (to be conservative), and I'm still working on wikilinks and formatting (please let me do this so I can get better at cleaning up articles!), but I'd like someone to go in and assess its quality to either verify it or change it accordingly. Mmagdalene722 (talk) 12:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- The article has been rated as B-class by users in the Medicine project, so I'm going to bump up the rating in the USG box as well. Feel free to change and leave comments regarding rationale. Mmagdalene722 (talk) 19:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Storm Prediction Center has been in the USGOV project since early 2008, and has yet to receive an assessment. I have made major changes to the article, so now might be a good time to assess it. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 22:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
- Vehicles of the President of the United States. A new article taking a broad look a presidential transportation.
- Viva América. Kind assess this article. Improvements include: new links to Voice of America, American Forces Network, cultural diplomacy, Good Neighbor Policy and Nelson Rockefeller with references and an infobox. Many thanks in advance - with best wishes 104.207.219.150 (talk) 19:17, 4 October 2018 (UTC)PJ
- Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs - Kindly reassess this article. Since its last assessment in 2012 it has been expanded, embellished with images, photographs and an External Audio box, external reference links, along with additional references from government archives. The article has clearly evolved beyond its initial Stub classification. Many thanks in advance for your thoughtful assistance and best wishes for the continued success of your editorial services on Wikipedia. 160.72.81.86 (talk) 23:13, 9 November 2021 (UTC)GCL
- Welcome.US Requesting an assessment of this new article that I created. CT55555 (talk) 23:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- Fugitive Felon Act - Revised significantly today, probably not a stub anymore. Eithersummer (talk) 1:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
- Invention Secrecy Act -- Hopefully, I'm listing this properly. I have expanded this substantially from this to this, and I think it's due for a review? Thanks! I still have a large number of unused sources to go through but have been pinched substantially for time. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 23:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Assessment log
[edit]November 21, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- 1887 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
- 1893 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
- 1994 United States Senate election in Virginia (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2002 United States Senate election in South Dakota (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2018 United States Senate election in Mississippi (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2020 United States House of Representatives election in Alaska (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2020 United States House of Representatives elections in Wisconsin (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Arab immigration to the United States (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for International Markets (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- IRS Criminal Investigation (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Recess appointment (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from B-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Draft:ERA Coalition (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
November 20, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- 2012 Minnesota House of Representatives election (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2012 United States Senate election in Washington (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2012 United States Senate election in West Virginia (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2013 Minnesota House of Representatives District 19A special election (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- 2014 Minnesota gubernatorial election (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Aaron S. Williams (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Artemis Accords (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- John David Provoo (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Mohammed Haydar Zammar (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- SS Armonia (1924) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- United States v. Young (1914) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- United States v. Young (1985) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
November 19, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]- Foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration renamed to Foreign policy of the first Donald Trump administration.
Reassessed
[edit]- United States Bureau of Efficiency (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Redirect-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Foreign policy of the first Donald Trump administration (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- United States v. Young (1877) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
November 18, 2024
[edit]Renamed
[edit]- E. Allan Lightner, Jr. renamed to E. Allan Lightner Jr..
- First Trump administration political interference with science agencies renamed to Political interference with science agencies by the first Trump administration.
Reassessed
[edit]- Aguilar v. Texas (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
- Department of Government Efficiency (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- E. Allan Lightner Jr. (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Political interference with science agencies by the first Trump administration (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
November 17, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- 2024 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Doug Collins (politician) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Health care prices in the United States (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as High-Class. (rev · t)
- History of the United States dollar (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as High-Class. (rev · t)
- John Garamendi (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
November 16, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- House China Task Force (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Department of Government Efficiency (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- United States v. Doremus (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Velazquez v. Garland (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
November 15, 2024
[edit]Reassessed
[edit]- Durham special counsel investigation (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to High-Class. (rev · t)
- Gang of Six (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to List-Class. (rev · t)
- List of people who have held constitutional office in all three branches of the United States federal government (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to List-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from NA-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Same-sex marriage in the United States (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
[edit]- Dina Powell (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- El Salvador Caucus (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:First presidency of Donald Trump (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- King Alfred Plan (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Torture in the United States (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
[edit]- Category:Presidency of Donald Trump (talk) removed.
- ^ For example, this image of the Battle of Normandy is grainy, but very few pictures of that event exist. However, where quite a number of pictures exist, for instance, the moon landing, FPC attempts to select the best of the ones produced.
- ^ An image has more encyclopedic value (often abbreviated to "EV" or "enc" in discussions) if it contributes strongly to a single article, rather than contributing weakly to many. Adding an image to numerous articles to gain EV is counterproductive and may antagonize both FPC reviewers and article editors.
- ^ While effects such as black and white, sepia, oversaturation, and abnormal angles may be visually pleasing, they often detract from the accurate depiction of the subject.