Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)/Assessment

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Main pageTalkPopular PagesAssessmentPortalArticle
Alerts		To doProject Banner
WikiProject New York
Project news
General
Project home (WP:WPNY) talk
Portal (P:NY) talk
Assessment
Department home (WP:WPNY/A) talk
Project statistics:
→ Table
→ Log
→ Category
Recognized content (WP:WPNY/RC) talk
Statewide overview (WP:WPNY/A/O) talk
Maintenance
Article alerts (WP:WPNY/AA) talk
Unreferenced BLPs talk
To-do list talk
— related changes

Welcome to WikiProject New York (state)'s assessment department. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's New York (state) 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.

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

Frequently asked questions

[edit]
Who can assess articles?
Any editor is free to add or change the rating of an article, but please follow the quality and importance criteria specified below.
Why didn't the reviewer leave any comments?
Unfortunately, due to the volume of articles that need to be assessed, reviewers 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 leave a post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York (state) or list it for peer review.
What if I don't agree with a rating?
You may contact the editor who reviewed the article and ask them to take another look, or leave a post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York (state).
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are, particularly in terms of judging importance. However, the criteria used by WPNY are no more nor no less subjective than those used by any other WikiProject.
Why does WPNY only tag some New York-related articles, not all of them?
In the past, some of WPNY's subprojects, particularly WikiProject New York City, had removed the WPNY banner from any and (nearly) all articles within their scope, leaving said articles covered only by the subproject. In 2012, it was decided at the WPNY level to tag articles covered by subprojects based solely on the article's importance to the state, both to avoid the slippery slope of endless article tagging by one parent project after another and to codify when articles should and should not be solely tagged by a subproject. The end result is that the subprojects can maintain articles of local importance while WPNY can focus its efforts on articles of greater importance to the state.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department, or leave a post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York (state).

Instructions

[edit]
Current assessment statistics
New York (state) articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 2 4 16 64 86
FL 3 2 14 19
FM 135 135
A 5 5
GA 4 9 42 302 124 481
B 13 65 140 715 351 1,284
C 8 174 327 2,399 946 3,854
Start 10 554 2,112 8,248 4,513 15,437
Stub 25 3,174 6,796 1 4,671 14,667
List 15 114 341 3 211 684
Category 8,827 8,827
Disambig 62 62
File 485 485
Portal 256 256
Project 156 156
Redirect 1 3 210 2,576 2,790
Template 869 869
Other 1 8 43 52
Assessed 37 850 5,931 19,102 13,413 10,816 50,149
Unassessed 7 47 54
Total 37 850 5,931 19,109 13,413 10,863 50,203
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 185,398 Ω = 5.18

An article's assessment is generated from the values entered in the {{{class}}} and {{{importance}}} parameters of the {{WikiProject New York (state)}} talk page banner template.

Assessing for quality

[edit]

An article's quality assessment is recorded using the |class= parameter in the {{WikiProject banner shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject New York (state)}} 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 New York (state) articles category)  FA
FL (for featured lists only; adds them to the FL-Class New York (state) articles category)  FL
A (for articles that passed a formal peer review only; adds them to the A-Class New York (state) articles category)  A
GA (for good articles only; adds them to the GA-Class New York (state) articles category)  GA
B (for articles that satisfy all of the B-Class criteria; adds them to the B-Class New York (state) articles category) B
C (for substantial articles; adds them to the C-Class New York (state) articles category) C
Start (for developing articles; adds them to the Start-Class New York (state) articles category) Start
Stub (for basic articles; adds them to the Stub-Class New York (state) articles category) Stub
List (for stand-alone lists; adds them to the List-Class New York (state) articles category) List
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unwarranted; adds them to the NA-Class New York (state) pages category) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in the Unassessed New York (state) articles category) ???
For non-mainspace content, the following values may be used:
FM (for featured media only; adds them to the FM-Class New York (state) pages category)  FM
Category (for categories; adds them to the Category-Class New York (state) pages category) Category
Draft (for drafts; adds them to the Draft-Class New York (state) pages category) Draft
File (for files and timed text; adds them to the File-Class New York (state) pages category) File
Portal (for portal pages; adds them to the Portal-Class New York (state) pages category) Portal
Project (for project pages; adds them to the Project-Class New York (state) pages category) Project
Template (for templates and modules; adds them to the Template-Class New York (state) 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 New York (state) pages category) Disambig
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds them to the Redirect-Class New York (state) pages category) Redirect

Assessing for importance

[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject New York (state)}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject New York (state)|importance=???}}

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 New York (state) articles)  Top 
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance New York (state) articles)  High 
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance New York (state) articles)  Mid 
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance New York (state) articles)  Low 
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance New York (state) articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance New York (state) articles)  ??? 

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. Briarcliff Manor, New York
 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 tallest buildings in New York City
 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. File:New York Midtown Skyline at night - Jan 2006 edit1.jpg
 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 Fort Washington
 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. Albany, New York
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. New York City
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. New York (state)
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. Thomas DiNapoli
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. 1000 Islands Tower
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 cities in New York
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:New York (state)
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. New York
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:Flag of New York.svg
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:New York (state)
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 New York (state)
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. New York State
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:New York (state)

Importance scale

[edit]

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students of military history. Importance does not equate to quality; a featured article could rate 'mid' on importance.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated. Rate international region/country-specific articles from the perspective of someone from that region.

WikiProject New York (state) article importance grading scheme
Importance Criteria Examples Assessment tagging
Top Subject is a "core" or "key" topic for New York, or is generally notable to the public at large. Articles in this category shall be tagged for WPNY even if they also fall within the scope of one or more of New York's subprojects.
High Subject is notable in a significant and important way within the field of New York, but not necessarily outside it. Articles in this category shall be tagged for WPNY even if they also fall within the scope of one or more of New York's subprojects.
Mid Subject contributes to the total subject of the New York WikiProject. Subject may not necessarily be famous.

Articles to tag for WPNY even if they also fall within the scope of one or more of New York's subprojects:

Articles to tag for WPNY only if they do not fall within the scope of one or more of New York's subprojects:

Articles in this category shall be tagged for WPNY as noted under "Examples".
Low Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within the field of New York, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic.
  • Former state legislators and U.S. Representatives, except where they had particular importance in the state's history
  • Semi-pro and amateur sports teams, including individual college sports teams
  • Defunct athletic teams of all sorts
  • All other articles, particularly buildings, companies and organizations that just happen to be located in New York, and people who just happened to have lived in New York without contributing significantly to the state's history.
Articles in this category shall be tagged for WPNY only if they do not fall within the scope of one or more of New York's subprojects.

Assessment Log

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

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.


July 23, 2025

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]

July 22, 2025

[edit]

Renamed

[edit]

Reassessed

[edit]

Assessed

[edit]

Removed

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_New_York_(state)/Assessment&oldid=1131418431"