WikiProject YouTube |
---|
Project Pages |
|
Help The Project |
Project Templates |
Wikipedia Templates |
Ads |
Tools |
changes |
The assessment department of WikiProject YouTube focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's YouTube articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the Version 1.0 Editorial Team program.
The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject YouTube}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:YouTube articles by quality and Category:YouTube articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. (Index · Statistics · Log)
Frequently asked questions
edit- See also the general assessment FAQ
Bx Dyson ixyiimrtm Choisy-le-Roi i Odi
- 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 {{WikiProject YouTube}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
- 3. Someone put a {{WikiProject YouTube}} 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 project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
- 4. Who can assess articles?
- Any member of the YouTube 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. 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.
- 6. 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.
- 7. What if I don't agree with a rating?
- 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.
- 8. 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!
Instructions
editQuality assessment
editAn article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject YouTube}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):
FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class YouTube articles) | FA | |
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class YouTube articles) | A | |
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class YouTube articles) | GA | |
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class YouTube articles) | B | |
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class YouTube articles) | C | |
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class YouTube articles) | Start | |
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class YouTube articles) | Stub | |
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class YouTube articles) | FL | |
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class YouTube articles) | List |
For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:
Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class YouTube articles) | Category | |
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class YouTube articles) | Disambig | |
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class YouTube articles) | Draft | |
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class YouTube articles) | File | |
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class YouTube articles) | Portal | |
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class YouTube articles) | Project | |
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class YouTube articles) | Redirect | |
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class YouTube articles) | Template | |
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class YouTube articles) | NA | |
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed YouTube articles) | ??? |
Quality scale
editClass | 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.
|
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. | N/A |
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:
|
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. | N/A |
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:
|
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. | N/A |
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
|
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. | N/A |
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. | N/A |
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:
|
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. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. | N/A |
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. | N/A |
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. | N/A |
Importance assessment
editAn article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject YouTube}} project banner on its talk page:
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 YouTube articles) | Top | |
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance YouTube articles) | High | |
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance YouTube articles) | Mid | |
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance YouTube articles) | Low | |
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance YouTube articles) | NA | |
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance YouTube articles) | ??? |
Importance scale
editImportance | Criteria | Example |
---|---|---|
Top | Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field. | Kindergarten |
High | Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Factory Acts |
Mid | Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | 0.999... |
Low | Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. | G cell |
NA | Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. | Category:Palms |
??? | Subject importance has not yet been assessed. | ??? |