Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece/Assessment

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Greece
(Redirected from Wikipedia:HOGA)
Main pageTalk pageOpen tasksNew articlesArticle assessmentOutreachResourcesShowcaseMembers
WikiProject Greece [ edit · changes ]
Project pages
Related pages
Article alerts

Did you know

Articles for deletion

  • 15 Nov 2024 – Ela Giorgi (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by CoconutOctopus (t · c); see discussion (2 participants)
  • 12 Nov 2024 – Hatzichristos (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by JMWt (t · c); see discussion (1 participant; relisted)
  • 31 Oct 2024 – Lampad (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by Endlesspumpkin (t · c) was closed as no consensus by Asilvering (t · c) on 16 Nov 2024; see discussion (4 participants; relisted)

Proposed deletions

Categories for discussion

Good article nominees

Featured article reviews

Good article reassessments

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

Articles to be split

Articles for creation

Article statistics

This list is generated automatically every night around 10 PM EST.
view full worklist

Greek articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 3 15 32 45 1 96
FL 1 1 1 22 25
A 2 9 16 1 28
GA 9 40 104 290 22 465
B 42 156 318 611 101 1,228
C 37 229 528 1,759 400 2,953
Start 42 409 1,837 10,097 1 1,887 14,273
Stub 1 59 714 10,607 17 3,839 15,237
List 4 14 103 566 76 304 1,067
Category 2 13,120 13,122
Disambig 325 325
File 577 577
Redirect 12 78 519 931 1,540
Template 1,367 1,367
NA 5 56 61
Other 2 51 53
Assessed 139 937 3,724 24,541 16,521 6,555 52,417
Unassessed 1 7 1 547 556
Total 139 937 3,725 24,548 16,522 7,102 52,973
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 179,152 Ω = 5.23
Shortcuts

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Greece! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Greece and Greek related 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 WP:1.0 program,

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Greece}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Greek articles by quality.

FAQ

edit
See also the general assessment 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 {{WikiProject Greece}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Greece}} 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 Greece 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 that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
6. Are there any special procedures in order to rate an article as A-Class?
Any member of the project can rate an article as A-Class, because in our project there is no A-Class review process as happens in other projects (e.g. in WP:MILHIST). Members of the project should keep the criteria for featured articles in mind when rating an article as A-Class. However, please note that (unlike actual featured articles) A-Class articles are not expected to fully meet all of the criteria; a comprehensive, accurate, well-sourced, and decently-written article should qualify for A-Class status even if it could use some further copyediting. An article, which has not reached GA status or has not passed successfully a formal A-Class review in another project should not be rated as A-Class.
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 department 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 that must be followed; this is documented in the assessment instructions.
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.

Assessment instructions

edit

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WikiProject Greece}} 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 Greek articles)  FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Greek articles)  A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Greek articles)  GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Greek articles) B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Greek articles) C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Greek articles) Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Greek articles) Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Greek articles)  FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Greek 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 Greek articles) Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Greek articles) Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Greek articles) Draft
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Greek articles) File
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Greek articles) Redirect
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Greek articles) Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Greek articles) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Greek articles) ???

Quality scale

edit
Label Criteria Formal process Example
FA
{{FA-Class}} 		Reserved for articles that meet the featured article criteria and have received featured article status after community review. Featured article candidates Hippocrates (as of November 2010)
A
{{A-Class}} 		Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. The Project lacks its own A-Class review process. Articles that have been reviewed as A-Class by other projects like WP:MILHIST are automatically eligible. Battle of Marathon (as of November 2010)
GA
{{GA-Class}} 		Reserved for articles that meet the good article criteria and have received good article status. Good article nominations Battle of Bathys Ryax (as of November 2010)
B
{{B-Class}} 		The article meets the following five criteria:
  1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited.
  2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies.
  3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
  4. It is free from major grammatical errors.
  5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.
 May be assigned by any reviewer. The B-class checklist is available through {{WikiProject Greece}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details); if not all criteria are met, the article is automatically assessed as C-class. Alexander the Great (as of November 2010)
C
{{C-Class}} 		The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup.
More detailed criteria
The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.
May be assigned by any reviewer. In practice, C-class should be reserved for articles that fulfill at least three of the B-class criteria, including at least one of #1 (references) and #2 (coverage). The B-class checklist is available through {{WikiProject Greece}} to track the criteria (see the project banner instructions for more details). Antiochus III the Great (as of November 2010)
Start
{{Start-Class}} 		The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element; it has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:
  • A particularly 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
 May be assigned by any reviewer Aetolian League (as of November 2010)
Stub
{{Stub-Class}} 		The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. May be assigned by any reviewer Acronauplia (as of November 2010)

Importance scheme

edit
Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Core topics about Greece. Generally, these topics are sub-articles of the main Greece article, vital for the understanding of Greece or extremely notable to people outside of Greece. Biographies should be limited to the top Greek people in a particular field or persons of the greatest historical importance Greece and the "X of Greece" articles (such as History of Greece), Alexander the Great.
High Topics that are very notable within Greece, and well-known outside of it, and can be reasonably expected to be included in any print encyclopedia. This includes cities with a population of more than 100,000. History of Crete
Mid Topics that are reasonably notable on a national level within Greece without necessarily being famous or very notable internationally, including smaller towns. Muslim minority of Greece
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 Greece. Galatsi
NA Non-articles, templates, categories, redirects, etc. {{WikiProject Greece}}


Requests for 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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the peer review department instead. Reviewers: once you have reviewed the article and determined the proper assessment rating, you may remove it from this list.

  1. Turkish invasion of Cyprus - This article has three different classifications by five different projects, attempting to gain some consesnsus on class. Thanks, SalopianJames (talk) 12:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Hellenic Parliament - Be gentle. panionios1890 (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2013 (EET)
  3. Greater Albania The article currently has the Top-importance assessment, which is the highest possible. I believe is way too high for the WikiProject Greece. I lowered it for now to Mid-importance, but I could appreciate an outside opinion for a re-assessment. --SilentResident (talk) 03:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Apage is Start-class in assessment but really should be a stub. Until recently, it even had a stub template, but that was removed due to the conflict with the assessment. There is a discussion on the talk page about this, although it is brief. Thanks! —Geekdiva (talk) 06:54, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Optative (Ancient Greek) This article has recently been comprehensively rewritten and expanded. Request for reassessment. – Kanjuzi (talk) 06:11, 25 October 2016 (UTC) – It also has a companion piece, the newly written Subjunctive (Ancient Greek) which has not yet been assessed. – Kanjuzi (talk) 10:53, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Crito. I recently finished translating the article after it had turned out that it was plagiarized, so I believe a reassessment in in order. puggo (talk) 07:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  7. PAOK FC. I performed a large edit on this page, added a lot of references, tables and tags. I'd be interested in a re-assessment and how to further improve it. Article has already been rated as B-Class and Mid-importance on the WikiProject Football (as of 8 April 2020). Thank you in advance! Abudabanas (talk) 11:20, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Kouros. While I have not personally improved the article beyond a sentence, the article has underwent large changes since its last assessment in 2008, so I would be doing a disservice not to request reassessment of it on those grounds. Thanks! Tyrone Madera (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. FYTA - I added a list of significant work, lots of references and quotes about their relevance to the contemporary art scene. It is rated stub at the moment, a new rating would be welcome Thanks Respecttherights 14:54, 2021-08-23 UTC
  10. Apollo and Daphne - I have done a bit of an overhaul on the page, removing a lot of "book report" styling and opinions and trying to make it more about the story than our interpretation of it's meaning. It could still use some work, which I intend to do, but I think it's well past stub-class. Lindsey40186 (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Skala Eresou - I think at this point, it needs to be downgraded to Stub. I haven't made any changes to it, just for clarification. In addition to barely having any information, it still suffers from the advertisement bias which was noted back in Aug 2020. Amyipdev (talk) 16:44, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  12. West Lesbos - agree it should remain Stub, but I think we should assign an importance rating to it of Low. Amyipdev (talk) 18:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Greece–Turkey relations Has underdone a massive revision in the last 12 months, including a source check which failed the previous B grading. Please reassess so that is it no longer a C page. Elias (talk) 01:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Drapanias - just want to see what you think. The subject matter is no longer a travel guide, at least. DeemDeem52 (talk) 17:22, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Mimis Papaioannou - Significally expanded. Article has already been rated as a Good Article, but I think we should assign an importance rating to it of Mid. BEN917 12:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Thomas Mavros - Significally expanded. BEN917 13:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Kostas Nestoridis - Significally expanded. BEN917 13:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Stelios Manolas - Significally expanded. BEN917 13:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Stelios Serafidis - Significally expanded. BEN917 13:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Elliniko Metro - Significally expanded to a point that it may qualify for a C grade. Can't confirm alone as I contributed a lot to the article. --Minoa (talk) 04:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Greece/Assessment&oldid=1234209722"