Wikipedia:WikiProject Literature/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Literature. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles related to literature, including his works and derivative works. The article ratings are used within the project itself to aid in recognising excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPLIT}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Literature articles by quality and Category:Literature articles by importance.

Current ratings[edit]

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How can I get my article rated? 
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
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? 
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.
Who can assess articles? 
Any member of the Literature WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
Where can I find articles to assess? 
Many articles in Category:Literature need to be assessed and any articles in Category:Unassessed Literature articles and Category:Unknown-importance Literature articles.

If you have any other questions that aren't listed here, feel free to ask them at the talk page.

How to assess articles[edit]

You can assess articles by placing the {{WPLIT}} banner on its talk page (not the article page!) and using the two parameters, class (to assess the quality) and importance (to assess the priority).

Quality assessments[edit]

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Literature}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Literature|class=???}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Quality scale for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Literature articles) Featured article FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Literature articles) A-Class article A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Literature articles)  GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Literature articles) B-Class article B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Literature articles) C-Class article C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Literature articles) Start-Class article Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Literature articles) Stub-Class article Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Literature articles) Featured list FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Literature articles)  List 

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Literature articles) Category page Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Literature articles) Disambiguation page Disambig 
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Literature articles)  Draft 
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Literature articles)  File 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Literature articles)  Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Literature articles)  Project 
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Literature articles)  Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Literature articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Literature articles)  ??? 

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Priority assessment[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WPLIT}} project banner on its talk page:

{{Wikiproject Literature| ... | importance=??? | ...}}
Top
High
Mid
Low
???

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

Priority scale[edit]

Label Criteria Examples
Top Literature, History of literature
High
Mid
Low

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.

Requested assessments

  1. Abkhaz literature. Rated start. Has info and 2 sources, but no citations.Yobmod (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Fan fiction Rated B. Lots of info, sourced, well presented and wikified.Yobmod (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  3. Homosexuality in speculative fiction
  4. Samuel Johnson, Christopher Smart and their works Ottava Rima (talk) 15:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC) Rated a long time ago for other projects, for literature I'd put Johnson as Top and Smart as low'. Ktlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  5. Storytelling--I've rated as start, though I have trimmed the article of essay-like writing. I am more interested in an importance rating. --Call me Bubba (talk) 17:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  6. Hamamatsu Chūnagon Monogatari DoneKtlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  7. León de Greiff. Not yet rated. mijotoba (talk) 07:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Low for his obscurity outside country of origin (though he looks quite interesting to me!) Ktlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  8. The London Jilt. Please assess. Drmies (talk) 01:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC) C class for good sources and inline citations. Mid importance for an interesting, studied topic that is not that widely known. Ktlynch (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  9. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harold Pinter/archive1 Needs prose review, spotchecks on sourcing and close paraphrasing checks. Jezhotwells (talk) 05:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  10. Collaborative_fiction has no rating AdamCaputo (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC) Has been rated/assessed. INeverCry 19:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
  11. Shooting an Elephant has had some (significant) additions.--Skittles the hog (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I rated it C-class. I feel it has gaps that prevent it from reaching B class (most notably the lack of information about its reception). Greengreengreenred 03:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
  12. Khwaja Muhammad Latif Ansari
  13. John Banville has significant recent additions and has not been re-assessed for quality for four years. — O'Dea (talk) 05:01, 2 March 2012 (UTC) I re-rated this article c-class. This still needs a bit of work to get it to b-class; there are several citation-needed tags. INeverCry 17:34, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
  14. English literature The current rating of "Start-class" seems somewhat unjust. Can it be updated? Rwood128 (talk) 14:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC) It has now been bumped up to C Class. That seems about right. --Ktlynch (talk) 18:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
  15. Women and children first - I'm just wondering if, as the phrase (and article topic) in question first appeared in a novel, would the article qualify for wikiproject literature? (Low importance, I'd imagine, but still...)--TyrS 16:19, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Reassessed as c, adding project, Sadads (talk) 16:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
  1. John Cowper Powys - This article has not been assessed. Rwood128 (talk) 21:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)  Done
  2. James Hanley (novelist) -- Not assessed  Done
  3. Khwaja Muhammad Latif Ansari Done
  4. Daniel Silva (novelist)--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 18:32, 31 October 2015 (UTC)  Done
  5. Parnassus plays  Done
  6. Franz Kurowski
    Reassessed as B, substantially research, is thorough, probably needs peer review or GA review, for substantial feedback, Sadads (talk) 14:20, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
  7. Renée Vivien Prize (new article currently unassessed), Trauenbaum (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  8. Hawthorne and His Mosses, an important essay the writing of Moby-Dick was interrupted for. No quality reassessment request, but the Priority ranking Low done on May 31 needs reconsideration. For reasons, see the article's Talk Page.MackyBeth (talk) 18:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
  9. The Philosophy of Composition by Poe does not have a banner at all yet, hence no assessment whatsoever.MackyBeth
  10. The Bridge on the Drina: rated Start Class, but upon recent expansion appears worthy of B. 23 editor (talk) 19:21, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

(talk) 11:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Literature/Assessment
en.wikipedia.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2018-39
136776
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:JUB4EPC74HONYSNYKUMVKFAIBMGN5PK2
<urn:uuid:bcf29176-06bb-4b19-8433-2b6c25c1787f>
2018-09-24T05:56:05Z
208.80.153.224
text/html
sha1:D6C3FSPRDEMCI3AEYQTZPGRTKYHITVDL
<urn:uuid:c2fabf57-7c35-4085-a8ba-84010420dfe6>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Literature/Assessment
response
<urn:uuid:bd4b5183-67ac-491a-8a53-b9c00850e1fe>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2018-39
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for September 2018
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-138-196-149.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/