| هــــزاره WikiProject Hazara |
|
|
|This project is a workgroup of WikiProject Hazara, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Hazara and Hazara-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Guidelines
Announcements
Article requests
New articles
To do
Miscellaneous
Template:WikiProject Hazara
Project category
Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Hazara articles by quality statistics
This page has been created to identify and assess articles related to the Hazara WikiProject. This worklist may also be used to identify key articles for use by the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team, who are working toward a set of articles suitable for release in print, CD, DVD, or some combination.
Use this page to identify articles related to Hazara people and to assess their priority and quality. Feel free to expand the list. When adding an article, please add the template {{WikiProject Hazara}} to the articles talk page if it is not already there. Thanks.
Need: The article's importance, regardless of its quality
| Top | Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopaedia |
| High | Subject contributes a depth of knowledge |
| Mid | Subject fills in more minor details |
| Low | Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial |
Quality: current article quality
 FA |
Featured article |
 A |
Article is well written, reasonably complete and referenced; possible featured article candidate. |
 GA |
This is a good article. |
| B | We have a decent article, but it needs further editing. |
| Start | Significant cleanup or expansion needed. |
| Stub | Article is either a very short, or rough. |
Gradings are discussed in detail below.
These are the detailed criteria per class/quality division, following the assessment scheme used by the Wikipedia V1.0 Editorial team.
| 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:
Afeatured 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. | Cleopatra (as of June 2018) |
| 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. | List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
| 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 Nam River (as of June 2014) |
 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
Agood 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. | Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019) |
| 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. | Psychology (as of January 2024) |
| 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. | Wing (as of June 2018) |
| 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. | Ball (as of September 2014) |
| 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. | Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014) |
| List | Meets the criteria of a stand-alone listorset 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 literary movements |
We recognize that importance is a relative term. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another. Any importance ratings applied by this project, only reflect the perceived importance to this project. The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather it should serve as a guideline for project participants to determine which article should receive more attention.
| Label | Criteria | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Top | Definition: Subject is a must-have for a concise print encyclopedia or other reference work on Afghanistan. High probability that non-Afghans would look this up. Practical tip: these subjects just pop into your head when you think about Afghanistan and a specific field |
|
| High | Definition: Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopaedia. Is reasonably expected to be included into more comprehensive printed encyclopaedia. Practical tip: you know the subject and most likely would be able to recall it without looking at any sources |
|
| Mid | Definition: Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Could only be included in a multi-volume encyclopaedia. Practical tip: most likely you will recognize the subject if someone mentions it to you |
|
| Low | Definition: Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial. Practical tip: most likely you will not recognize the subject |