Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Louisville/Assessment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  • 1.3% List-Class
  • 32.5% Stub-Class
  • 48.1% Start-Class
  • 12% C-Class
  • 4.8% B-Class
  • 1% GA-Class
  • 0.2% FA-Class
Louisville articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA Total
FA 12 3 15
FL 1 1
FM 5 5
GA 3 9 19 39 70
B 8 59 121 158 346
C 18 108 235 505 866
Start 2 66 357 3,042 3,467
Stub 6 200 2,134 2,340
List 2 14 40 40 96
Category 1,110 1,110
Disambig 17 17
File 2,136 2,136
Project 86 86
Redirect 1 4 46 1,027 1,078
Template 154 154
Draft 1 5 6
Assessed 33 263 989 5,968 4,540 11,793
Total 33 263 989 5,968 4,540 11,793
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 36,016 Ω = 5.07

This is the WikiProject Louisville Assessment department, which focuses on 1) assessing the quality of, and 2) assigning project importance to, Wikipedia's Louisville area-related articles. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.

As of 1 August 2025, there are 7,202 articles within the scope of WikiProject Louisville, of which 16 are featured and 70 are good articles. This makes up 0.1% of the articles on Wikipedia, 0.14% of all featured articles and lists, and 0.17% of all good articles. Including non-article pages, such as talk pages, redirects, categories, etc., there are 23,588 pages in the project.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in our project banner:
{{WikiProject United States|Louisville=yes|Louisville-importance=}}

When placed on an article's talk page, this causes the article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Louisville articles by quality and Category:Louisville articles by importance, whether you do an assessment or not.

Note: Sometimes an article will already have {{WikiProject United States}} on its talk page to accommodate other projects. In that case, simply add the following parameters to it: 

|Louisville=yes|Louisville-importance=

Frequently asked questions

[edit]
How can I get my article rated?
As a participant in WikiProject Louisville's efforts, listed or not, you can do it yourself. Follow the above directions for placing the project banner on its talk page and optionally, assess—if you choose not to assess, the article will automatically be listed under Category:Unassessed Louisville articles and someone involved in the project will eventually attend to its assessment. If you are unsure how to assess and want speedier assistance, or it is an article you changed since its last assessment and want it to be reassessed by somebody else, you may list it in the requesting an assessment section below.
Who can assess articles?
Any participant in WikiProject Louisville, listed or not, is free to add or change the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
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.
Where can I get more comments about my article?
You may ask any listed participant of the project their opinion, or make such a request on our project's talk page. You may also list it for a peer review (note: this is operated outside our project).
What if I don't agree with a rating?
Request a reassessment for the article as described above. Alternately, you can ask any listed participant of the project to rate the article again. Also, don't forget that you can reassess the article yourself.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on our project's talk page.

Instructions

[edit]

Quality assessment

[edit]

An article's quality assessment is recorded using the |class= parameter in the {{WikiProject banner shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject United States|Louisville=yes}} banner template on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.

The following standard grades may be used to describe the quality of mainspace articles (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds them to the FA-Class Louisville articles category)  FA
FL (for featured lists only; adds them to the FL-Class Louisville articles category)  FL
GA (for good articles only; adds them to the GA-Class Louisville articles category)  GA
B (for articles that satisfy all of the B-Class criteria; adds them to the B-Class Louisville articles category) B
C (for substantial articles; adds them to the C-Class Louisville articles category) C
Start (for developing articles; adds them to the Start-Class Louisville articles category) Start
Stub (for basic articles; adds them to the Stub-Class Louisville articles category) Stub
List (for stand-alone lists; adds them to the List-Class Louisville articles category) List
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unwarranted; adds them to the NA-Class Louisville pages category) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in the Unassessed Louisville articles category) ???

For non-mainspace content, the following values may be used:

FM (for featured media only; adds them to the FM-Class Louisville pages category)  FM
Category (for categories; adds them to the Category-Class Louisville pages category) Category
Draft (for drafts; adds them to the Draft-Class Louisville pages category) Draft
File (for files and timed text; adds them to the File-Class Louisville pages category) File
Project (for project pages; adds them to the Project-Class Louisville pages category) Project
Template (for templates and modules; adds them to the Template-Class Louisville pages category) Template

The following non-standard assessment grades for mainspace content may be used at a WikiProject's discretion:

Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds them to the Disambig-Class Louisville pages category) Disambig
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds them to the Redirect-Class Louisville pages category) Redirect
Note
  • After assessing an article's quality, any comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

Quality scale

[edit]
WikiProject content quality grading scheme
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.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.
 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. Jennifer Lawrence
 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:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.
 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 Louisville Colonels managers
 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:
  1. Is of a high technical standard.
    • It has good contrast, accurate exposure and neutral colour balance.
    • It shows no significant compression artifacts, burned-out highlights, image noise ("graininess") or other processing anomalies (examples of common technical problems).
    • Its main subject is in focus, it has good composition and has no highly distracting or obstructing elements.
    • Exceptions to this rule may be made for historical or otherwise unique images. If it is considered impossible to find a technically superior image of a given subject, lower quality may sometimes be allowed.
  2. Is of high resolution.
    • It is of sufficiently high resolution to allow quality print reproduction. Still images should be a minimum of 1500 pixels in width and height (1500×1500px); larger sizes are generally preferred. The size of animated images is judged less strictly, though larger is still preferred (further information on image size).
      • Exceptions to this rule may be made where justified on a case-by-case basis, such as for historical, technically difficult or otherwise unique images, if no higher resolution could realistically be acquired. This should be explained in the nomination so that it can be taken into consideration.
      • Note that vector graphics in SVG format omit any requirement for any pixel count.
      • Animations and video may be somewhat smaller.
  3. Is among Wikipedia's best work.
    • It is a photograph, diagram, image or animation which is among the best examples of a given subject that the encyclopedia has to offer.
    • It illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more. A photograph has appropriate lighting to maximize visible detail; diagrams and other illustrations are clear and informative.
    • A featured picture is not always required to be aesthetically pleasing; it might be shocking, impressive, or just highly informative. Highly graphic, historical and otherwise unique images may not have to be classically beautiful at all. See these examples for a basic guide.
    • commons:Help:Scanning offers advice on preparing non-photographic media (engravings, illustrations from books, etc) in your possession for Wikipedia.
  4. Has a free license. It is available in the public domain or under a free license. Fair use images are not allowed. To check which category a particular image tag falls under, see the list at Wikipedia:File copyright tags.
  5. Adds significant encyclopedic value to an article and helps readers to understand an article.
    • The image is used in one or more articles. It is preferable to wait a reasonable period of time (at least 7 days) after the image is added to the article before nominating it, though this may be ignored in obvious cases, such as replacing a low-resolution version of an image with a higher resolution of the same image.
    • A picture's encyclopedic value (referred to as "EV") is given priority over its artistic value.
  6. Is verifiable. It is supported by facts in the article or references cited on the image page, or is from a source noted for its accuracy. It is not created to propose new original research, such as unpublished ideas or arguments.
  7. Has a descriptive, informative and complete file description in English. A complete file description:
    • Properly identifies the main subject, including Latin and technical names where applicable.
    • Describes the context of the photograph, painting, or other medium. Geotagging photographs of identifiable places is encouraged. This entails providing the coordinates of where the camera was when the medium was recorded to an appropriate degree of precision no less than ~10 km² (see Commons:Geocoding, or Template:Coord if the image is hosted on the English Wikipedia).
    • States the most relevant meta-detail (such as date, location, event, version, etc). It is suggested that additional relevant information that becomes known during the course of the nomination be subsequently included in the file description.
    • May include languages other than English but there must be an English version available that meets this criterion. The file name may be in a language other than English.
  8. Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation.
    • Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in a photographic image is generally acceptable provided it is limited, well-done, and not deceptive.
    • Typical acceptable manipulation includes cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction.
    • More extensive manipulation should be clearly described in the image text.
    • Any manipulation which causes the main subject to be misrepresented is unacceptable.
    • Note that this criterion is not relevant to vector-based SVG images, as the entire image is a digital construction.
 The page contains a featured image, sound clip or other media-related content. Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited.
 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:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 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. George Rogers Clark or
Old Louisville
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
  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
  3. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
 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. Muhammad Ali or
Louisville, Kentucky
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. Kentucky Derby or
Louisville Cardinals
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:
  • A useful picture or graphic
  • Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
 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. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon. Actors Theatre of Louisville or
Louisville Male High School
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. Floyds Knobs, Indiana or
Southern Exposition
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 mayors of Louisville, Kentucky
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:Buildings and structures in New Albany, Indiana
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. Louisville Colonels (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.
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. WP:WikiProject Louisville
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. Louisville
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:Louisville City FC

Importance assignment

[edit]

An article's importance assignment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject United States}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject United States| ... | Louisville-importance=??? | ...}}
Top
High
Mid
Low
???

The following values may be used for importance assignments:

Importance scale

[edit]
Label Criteria Examples
Top Core topics about Louisville. Generally, these topics are sub-articles of the main Louisville article, vital for the understanding of Louisville or extremely notable to people outside of Louisville. This category should stay limited to approximately 100 members. Biographies should be limited to the top one or two Louisvillians in a particular field or persons of the greatest historical importance. History of Louisville, Kentucky or
Muhammad Ali
High Topics that are very notable within Louisville, and well-known outside of it, and can be reasonably expected to be included in any print encyclopedia. Jeffersontown, Kentucky or
Thunder Over Louisville
Mid Topics that are reasonably notable on a local level within Louisville without necessarily being famous or very notable outside of Louisville. Colonial Gardens or
Shawnee Park
Low Topics of mostly local interest or those that are only included for complete coverage or as examples of a higher-level topic; peripheral or trivial topics or topics that have only a limited connection to Louisville. Bacon's or
Jim Porter (giant)

Articles needing attention

[edit]

If an article is in need of immediate attention (proper sourcing, significant cleanup, etc.), please denote this using the template as follows:

{{WikiProject United States|Louisville=yes|...|attention=yes|...}}

This will add the article to Category:Louisville articles needing attention. Also, add your concerns to the article's talk page, so an editor wishing to address the problem(s) can focus his or her efforts.

Please review this category from time to time to see if you can help with an article needing attention. Once the major problems have been addressed, please remove the attention notation from the template on the talk page.

Requesting an assessment or re-assessment

[edit]

To submit an article for assessment or inclusion in WikiProject Louisville, please add it to the request list.

Articles may be submitted or re-submitted at any time. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use Wikipedia's peer review department instead.

Assessment log

[edit]
Louisville articles:
Index · Statistics · Log
The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.


August 1, 2025

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 31, 2025

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 30, 2025

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 29, 2025

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

July 28, 2025

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 27, 2025

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

July 26, 2025

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

References

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Louisville/Assessment&oldid=1297561979"