Main pageDiscussionNews &
open tasks
AcademyAssessmentA-Class
review
ContestAwardsMembers
Military history WikiProject Main project page + talk News & open tasks Academy Core work areas Assessment Main page  → A-Class FAQ  → B-Class FAQ  → A-Class review requests  → Assessment requests  → Current statistics  → Review alert box Contests Main page  → Contest entries  → Scoring log archive  → Scoreboard archive Coordination Main page + talk  → Handbook  → Bugle newsroom talk  → ACM eligibility tracking  → Discussion alert box Incubator Main page  → Current groups and initiatives Special projects Majestic Titan talk Member affairs Membership Full list talk  → Active / Inactive  → Userboxes Awards Main page talk  →A-Class medals  →A-Class crosses  → WikiChevrons w/ Oak Leaves Resources Guidelines Content Notability Style Templates Infoboxes  → Command structure doc · talk  → Firearm cartridge doc · talk  → Military award doc · talk  → Military conflict doc · talk  → Military installation doc · talk  → Military memorial doc · talk  → Military person doc · talk  → Military unit doc · talk  → National military doc · talk  → Military operation doc · talk  → Service record doc · talk  → Militant organization doc · talk  → Weapon doc · talk Navigation boxes doc · talk  → Campaignboxes doc · talk Project banner doc · talk Announcement & task box  → Discussion alert box  → Review alert box Template design style doc · talk Showcase Featured articles 1278 Featured lists 145 Featured topics 32 Featured pictures 470 Featured sounds 69 Featured portals 5 A-Class articles 677 A-Class lists 40 Good articles 5,138 Automated lists Article alerts Most popular articles New articles Nominations for deletion Task forces General topics Fortifications Intelligence Maritime warfare Military aviation Military culture, traditions, and heraldry Military biography Military historiography Military land vehicles Military logistics and medicine Military memorials and cemeteries Military science, technology, and theory National militaries War films Weaponry Nations and regions African military history Asian military history Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history Balkan military history Baltic states military history British military history Canadian military history Chinese military history Dutch military history European military history French military history German military history Indian military history Italian military history Japanese military history Korean military history Middle Eastern military history Nordic military history North American military history Ottoman military history Polish military history Roman and Byzantine military history Russian, Soviet and CIS military history South American military history South Asian military history Southeast Asian military history Spanish military history United States military history Periods and conflicts Classical warfare Medieval warfare Early Muslim military history Crusades Early Modern warfare Wars of the Three Kingdoms American Revolutionary War Napoleonic era American Civil War World War I World War II Cold War Post-Cold War Related projects Blades Espionage Firearms Pritzker Military Museum & Library Piracy Ships edit · changes

The assessment department of the Military history WikiProject focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's military history articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

Overview[edit]

Introduction[edit]

The assessment system used by the Military history WikiProject to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assess lists and similar non-prose articles. The progression of articles along these scales is described in greater detail below.

Prose article List article
Stub The first stage of an article's evolution is called a stub. A stub is an extremely short article that provides a basic description of the topic at best; it includes very little meaningful content, and may be little more than a dictionary definition. At this stage, it is often impossible to determine whether the topic should be covered by a prose article or a list, so this assessment level is shared between the two scales.
Arrow southwest.svg
Arrow southeast.svg
Start List A stub that undergoes some development will progress to the next stage of article evolution. An article at this stage provides some meaningful content, but is typically incomplete and lacks adequate references, structure, and supporting materials. At this stage, it becomes possible to distinguish between prose articles and lists; depending on its form, an article at this level will be assessed as a Start-Class prose article or a List-Class list.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
C CL As the article continues to develop, it will reach the C-Class level. At this stage, the article is reasonably structured and contains substantial content and supporting materials, but may still be incomplete or poorly referenced, but not both. As articles progress to this stage, the assessment process begins to take on a more structured form, and specific criteria are introduced against which articles are rated.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
B BL An article that reaches the B-Class level is complete in content and structure, adequately referenced, and includes reasonable supporting materials; overall, it provides a satisfactory encyclopedic presentation of the topic for the average reader, although it might not be written to the standard that would be expected by an expert. Articles at this stage commonly undergo peer review to solicit ideas for further improvement. B-Class is the final assessment level that can be reached without undergoing a formal review process, and is a reasonable goal for newer editors.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
GA After reaching the B-Class level, an article may be submitted for assessment as a good article. Good articles must meet a set of criteria similar to those required for the B-Class assessment level, and must additionally undergo the formal good article review process. This assessment level is available only for prose articles; no comparable level exists for lists.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
A
AL
A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for the A-Class assessment level. An A-Class article presents a complete and thorough encyclopedic treatment of a subject, such as might be written by an expert in the field; the only deficiencies permissible at this level are minor issues of style or language. To receive an A-Class rating, a candidate article must undergo the formal military history A-Class review process. The A-Class rating is the highest assessment level that may be assigned by an individual WikiProject; higher assessment levels are granted only by Wikipedia-wide independent assessment processes.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
FA
FL
The featured article and featured list ratings represent the pinnacle of article evolution and the best that Wikipedia has to offer; an article at this level is professional, outstanding, and represents a definitive source for encyclopedic information. Featured status is assigned only through a thorough independent review process; this process can be grueling for the unprepared, and editors are highly advised to submit articles for A-Class review prior to nominating them for featured status.

Criteria[edit]

The following tables summarize the criteria used to assess articles at each level of the quality assessment scale. In addition to the criteria, the tables list the assessment process used at each level and provide an example of an article previously assessed at that level.

Assessment criteria for prose articles
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
FA
The article meets all the featured article criteria. Featured article candidacy USS Chesapeake (as of October 2021)
A
The article meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review Spendius (as of October 2021)
GA The article meets all of the good article criteria. Good article review Punic Wars (as of October 2021)
B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. Individual review 10th Texas Field Battery (as of October 2021)
C The article meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review Yellow Turban Rebellion (as of October 2021)
Start The article meets the Start-Class criteria. Individual review Battle of Monnaie (as of October 2021)
Stub The article meets none of the Start-Class criteria. Individual review Geng Yan (as of October 2021)
Assessment criteria for lists
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
FL
The list meets all the featured list criteria. Featured list candidacy List of protected cruisers of France (as of October 2021)
AL
The list meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review List of Partisan detachments in Bosnia and Herzegovina (as of October 2021)
BL The list meets all of the B-Class criteria. Individual review List of British colours lost in battle (as of October 2021)
CL The list meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review List of participants in the Nine Years' War (as of October 2021)
List The list meets the List-Class criteria. Individual review Atlanta campaign Confederate order of battle, second phase (as of October 2021)
Stub The list meets none of the List-Class criteria. Individual review List of supercavitating torpedoes (as of October 2021)

Processes[edit]

This section describes the different processes used to assess the quality of military history articles.

Individual review[edit]

The individual review process is used for all assessment activities up to the B-Class level. In this process, any editor may review an article against the listed criteria and assign the corresponding quality rating themselves.

Article authors are free to assess their own articles under this process. However, by convention, the final assessment for a B-Class rating is typically left to an independent editor; requests for an independent assessment may be made at the assessment request page.

Peer review[edit]

The peer review process is not used to evaluate an article for a particular assessment level directly; rather, it is a forum where article authors can solicit ideas for further improvements. Peer review is most often requested when an article is at the C-Class or B-Class level; articles at lower levels are typically so incomplete that a meaningful review is impossible, while articles at higher levels go through more formal review processes.

By convention, military history articles are typically listed in the history section of the main peer review request page; however, articles may be listed in other sections if their primary topic lies in another field.

Good article review[edit]

The good article nomination process is an independent review mechanism through which an article receives a "good article" quality rating. The process involves a detailed review of the article by an independent examiner, who determines whether the article meets the good article criteria.

Full instructions for requesting a good article review are provided on the good article review page.

A-Class article/list review[edit]

The military history A-Class review process is the most thorough and demanding assessment of article quality done by the Military history WikiProject. An article that undergoes this process must be reviewed by at least three independent examiners, each of whom must agree that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria.

Full instructions for requesting an A-Class review are provided on the A-Class review page.

Featured article/list candidacy[edit]

The featured article candidacy and featured list candidacy processes are an independent, Wikipedia-wide quality assessment mechanism; these processes are the only way an article can receive a "featured" quality rating. The process involves a comprehensive review of the article by multiple independent examiners, all of whom must agree that the article meets the featured article or list criteria.

Full instructions for submitting a featured article or list candidacy are provided on the corresponding candidacy page. Editors are advised to carefully review the submission instructions; failing to follow them correctly may cause the submission to be rejected.

Instructions[edit]

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the ((WPMILHIST)) project banner on its talk page:

((WPMILHIST|class=))

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:

The class parameter should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following classes may be used for non-article pages; many are automatically generated by the template when it is placed on a page of the corresponding type:

FAQ[edit]

See also the general assessment FAQ and the project's B-Class assessment & criteria FAQ and A-Class review & criteria FAQ.
1. What is the purpose of the article ratings?
The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
Just add ((WPMILHIST)) to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a ((WPMILHIST)) template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. What should I do?
Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
4. Who can assess articles?
Any member of the Military history WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes.
5. Can I assess articles that I have written or contributed significantly to?
For the most part, yes—in fact, you are encouraged to do so. B-Class assessment, by convention, is generally undertaken by an independent editor (requests can be made here), and A-Class promotion requires the consensus of multiple independent reviewers. However, if your article falls within the Stub- to C-Class range, by awarding the rating yourself you are helping to prevent the assessment requests process becoming overloaded.
6. How do I rate an article?
Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
7. Can I request that someone else rate an article?
Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
8. 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.
9. Where can I get more comments about an article?
The peer review process can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
10. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
11. Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are somewhat subjective, but it's the best system we've been able to devise. If you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!
12. What if I have a question not listed here?
If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page, or contact the project coordinators directly.

Requests[edit]

Requests for A-Class review[edit]

Witold PileckiArthur PhillipHarry CrerarWilliam D. LeahyCSS Missouri1st Louisiana Regulars Infantry RegimentBattle of WinchelseaDuckport CanalRepublic F-84 ThunderjetBig Bertha (howitzer)Operation BajrangThomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732)Erwin Böhme7th Alabama Infantry RegimentFort SoutherlandM8 Armored Gun SystemEileen CollinsSayf al-Dawla


Requests for assessment[edit]

Please note that this section is transcluded from a separate requests page, which you may wish to add to your watchlist.

Editors can self-assess articles against the five B-class criteria(FAQ) up to and including C-Class. If you have made significant improvements to an article against one or more of B-class criteria and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below, specifying which criteria you have worked on. If you feel unable to assess against one or more of the B-class criteria, please say so when posting. Requests for formal A-Class review should be made at the review department. Please consider entering articles you have improved in the military history article writing contest.

Experienced assessors are encouraged to take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#AutoCheck report for June and check a few of ≈ B-Class assessments. Feel free to downgrade them if you consider they don't meet one or more the criteria. Please also delete any that you have checked. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight/Assessment, whose articles often overlap with military history topics.


  • Definitely not a stub. Great work on the expansion/citing. Assessed as a B. Zawed (talk) 09:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In the Battle of Britain section, consecutive sentences give different days for his assumption of command of JG 51. In the Eastern Front section, the English and link refer to the Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves . . ., while the German refers to the Knight's Cross with Golden Oak Leaves . . . (apparently different decorations). A bit of WP:OVERLINK (e.g. Operation Eagle Attack and Adlertag are linked to the same article in the same sentence. Lineagegeek (talk) 22:00, 28 July 2022 (UTC) And a question – since there were more than one kingdom in the German Empire, should his father's regiment be listed as "King of Prussia's", rather than just "King's"? Lineagegeek (talk) 22:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Lineagegeek:, fixed, reworded and removed overlinking. MisterBee1966 (talk) 04:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Back to at least B Class. Lineagegeek (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please also check the military history assessment backlog for articles needing assessment.

Assessment backlogs[edit]

Please help to clear any backlogs of unassessed articles in the following categories:

Statistics[edit]

  • Quality operations: A bot-generated daily log which lists articles Reassessed, Assessed and Removed.
  • Popular pages: List of top articles with the most frequent views, updated monthly.

Task forces (general topics)[edit]

Task forces (national and regional)[edit]

Task forces (periods and conflicts)[edit]

Special projects[edit]

Operation Majestic Titan assessment statistics

logcategory

Operation Majestic Titan (Phase I) assessment statistics

logcategory

Operation Majestic Titan (Phase II) assessment statistics

logcategory

Operation Majestic Titan (Phase III) assessment statistics

logcategory

Operation Majestic Titan (Phase IV) assessment statistics

logcategory

Operation Majestic Titan (Phase V) assessment statistics

logcategory
https://db0nus869y26v.cloudfront.net/en/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment
db0nus869y26v.cloudfront.net
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-49
260893
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:CZNZNKHKVBTIIIKO25TTTHPCG4T3R4FS
<urn:uuid:35aab85f-cb9c-496b-a897-f9f380d552a2>
2022-12-06T15:28:59Z
13.249.46.175
text/html
sha1:X45QGUJRMAUUV34ZAMTKGEE6N2RS3JKD
<urn:uuid:368e3e2a-937a-4393-8e19-3b07069123d7>
https://db0nus869y26v.cloudfront.net/en/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment
response
<urn:uuid:b117b96f-626c-4352-9e45-8c87c826c9c2>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-49
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for November/December 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-146
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.4-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/