Wikipedia talk:Content assessment: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Redirects with unneeded importance parameters |
Protegmatic (talk | contribs) →beged-kefet rating?: Reply |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:Stub [[User:48JCL|48JCL]] ([[User_talk:48JCL|talk]]) 21:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC) |
:Stub [[User:48JCL|48JCL]] ([[User_talk:48JCL|talk]]) 21:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC) |
||
:Thank you [[Special:Contributions/158.62.88.23|158.62.88.23]] ([[User talk:158.62.88.23|talk]]) 18:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
:Thank you [[Special:Contributions/158.62.88.23|158.62.88.23]] ([[User talk:158.62.88.23|talk]]) 18:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
||
== Content assessment frequency == |
|||
How often are articles graded and do they vary between articles? [[User:Theobrad|Theobrad]] ([[User talk:Theobrad|talk]]) 12:36, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:do they vary between genres/topics/categories [[User:Theobrad|Theobrad]] ([[User talk:Theobrad|talk]]) 12:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{replyto|Theobrad}} Articles ought to be assessed for importance either when the WikiProject banner is added, or soon after. Some get left unassessed for years. Once assessed, it should rarely change unless something significant happens - for example, a politician who had been serving at a purely local level might be elected to a national position, following which their importance for politics might be raised from low/mid to mid/high. |
|||
::Articles are assessed for quality (class) whenever somebody feels like it, provided that the old and new classes are both within the scale unassessed/stub/start/C/B. But for GA/A/FA, you need to make your case for regrading, one person can't do it alone. |
|||
::Unless the same person carries out all of the assessments, there will be variation (one person's Stub-Class might be another's Start-Class); but the higher up the quality scale you go, the variation should be lessened - this is particularly so of FA-Class, where several people carry out the assessment together. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] 🌹 ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 08:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::@[[User:Redrose64|Redrose64]] Thank you for your response. The reason I ask is that I am a paid Wikipedia editor and I have been working for a while on the 'Smart City' article. My work is nearly done and I am not under any obligation to change the rating of the article. However, from my personal interest in the communication of smart city information to the general public and to see the article be improved, I was wondering when/if an article like this might be reviewed again? [[User:Theobrad|Theobrad]] ([[User talk:Theobrad|talk]]) 09:28, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I would say that you should not assess the article yourself, but may request assessment by leaving a request at one or more of: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planning/Assessment#Requests for assessment]]; [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Artificial Intelligence]]; [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Systems]]; [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer science]]. Note that only the first of these has a formal request procedure - for the others you should start a new thread on the talk page that I linked. --[[User:Redrose64|<span style="color:#a80000; background:#ffeeee; text-decoration:inherit">Red</span>rose64]] 🌹 ([[User talk:Redrose64|talk]]) 17:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::thank you very much! I wasn't considering doing that myself :) [[User:Theobrad|Theobrad]] ([[User talk:Theobrad|talk]]) 18:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== B-class when citations are wrong? == |
== B-class when citations are wrong? == |
||
| Line 46: | Line 35: | ||
==Redirects with unneeded importance parameters== |
==Redirects with unneeded importance parameters== |
||
A redirect page needn't have an importance parameter, but many do. For example, [[User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/New Zealand]] has 2,190 such redirects. Is there an automated tool that can remove importance parameters from all redirect pages for an individual project? Or is there another way to tidy this up, say by programmatically collating them in the NA column without the work of removing the importance parameter? Thanks. [[User:Nurg|Nurg]] ([[User talk:Nurg|talk]]) 08:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC) |
A redirect page needn't have an importance parameter, but many do. For example, [[User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/New Zealand]] has 2,190 such redirects. Is there an automated tool that can remove importance parameters from all redirect pages for an individual project? Or is there another way to tidy this up, say by programmatically collating them in the NA column without the work of removing the importance parameter? Thanks. [[User:Nurg|Nurg]] ([[User talk:Nurg|talk]]) 08:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC) |
||
:Yes we could automatically rate these as NA and ignore the specified importance (as long as there was consensus for this). Then there would be no need to remove them all — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:11, 11 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== beged-kefet rating? == |
|||
The article on the Hebrew concept of [[Begadkefat]] seems to fulfil everything required of a B-Class article, except that it's quite short. It seems to be comprehensive within the topic, but I'm not sure if I can put it as B-Class yet. Thoughts? [[User:Robynfeather|Robynfeather]] ([[User talk:Robynfeather|talk]]) 17:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:That article needs more references in my opinion [[User:Protegmatic|Protegmatic]] ([[User talk:Protegmatic|talk]]) 13:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 13:00, 13 July 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Content assessment page. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 60 days  |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Sugarhill Ddot -2024
Pls can someone help in assessing the article Sugarhill Ddot? Thank You. 2RDD (talk) 13:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Stub 48JCL (talk) 21:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you 158.62.88.23 (talk) 18:23, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
B-class when citations are wrong?
Visa Requirements for US citizens has a B rating, but I keep finding citations completely irrelevant to the detail they claim to be supporting. 伟思礼 (talk) 05:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- @伟思礼: There is no such article. In any case, if you feel that an article's rating is inconsistent with its content, you should bring that matter up at the talk page of the article itself. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Redrose64 Visa requirements for United States citizens 48JCL (talk) 20:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think that was what the dude above was trying to say. 48JCL (talk) 20:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Chemical structure is incorrect.
In the chemotherapy article there is an incorrect structure for the reaction of a nitrogen mustard compound with guanine. The correct structure is available at A. Polavarpu, et al., "The Mechanism of Guanine Alkylation by Nitrogen Mustards: A Computational Study," Journal of Organic Chemistry, 77 (14), 5914-5921, 2012. 66.111.123.176 (talk) 22:23, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Your comment is off-topic for this page, which is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Wikipedia:Content assessment. Please express your concerns at the talk page for the specific article concerned. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:30, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirects with unneeded importance parameters
A redirect page needn't have an importance parameter, but many do. For example, User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/New Zealand has 2,190 such redirects. Is there an automated tool that can remove importance parameters from all redirect pages for an individual project? Or is there another way to tidy this up, say by programmatically collating them in the NA column without the work of removing the importance parameter? Thanks. Nurg (talk) 08:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes we could automatically rate these as NA and ignore the specified importance (as long as there was consensus for this). Then there would be no need to remove them all — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:11, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
beged-kefet rating?
The article on the Hebrew concept of Begadkefat seems to fulfil everything required of a B-Class article, except that it's quite short. It seems to be comprehensive within the topic, but I'm not sure if I can put it as B-Class yet. Thoughts? Robynfeather (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- That article needs more references in my opinion Protegmatic (talk) 13:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)