Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Frequently asked questions  





2 Instructions  



2.1  Quality assessment  





2.2  Quality scale  





2.3  Importance assessment  





2.4  Importance scale  







3 Requesting an assessment  
6 comments  




4 Log  














Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet/Assessment: Difference between revisions







Add links
 









Project page
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 





Help
 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Internet

Browse history interactively
 Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)
Line 35: Line 35:

|Book_example = [[Book:Internet]]

|Book_example = [[Book:Internet]]

|Cat_cat = yes

|Cat_cat = yes

|Cat_example = [[:Category:Internet]]

|Cat_example = [[:Category:Internet Standards]]

|Dab_cat = yes

|Dab_cat = yes

|Dab_example = [[Internet (disambiguation)]]

|Dab_example = [[Internet (disambiguation)]]

Line 60: Line 60:

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 the Internet.

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 the Internet.



''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.''

''Note that general notability need not believe 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.''



{{Importance scheme

{{Importance scheme

Line 76: Line 76:

|NA_text =

|NA_text =

|NA_example = [[:Category:Internet]]

|NA_example = [[:Category:Internet]]

|Unknown =

|Unknown = yes

|Unknown_text =

|Unknown_text =

|Unknown_example=

|Unknown_example= ???

}}

}}



Line 89: Line 89:


<!-- Please insert your requests at the bottom of the list. Use the following format: * [[article name]] ~~~~. Additional comments are optional. -->

<!-- Please insert your requests at the bottom of the list. Use the following format: * [[article name]] ~~~~. Additional comments are optional. -->

* [[Fastly]] - new article. [[Special:Contributions/2A02:C7F:963F:BA00:D1AA:6B7B:FE31:F56|2A02:C7F:963F:BA00:D1AA:6B7B:FE31:F56]] ([[User talk:2A02:C7F:963F:BA00:D1AA:6B7B:FE31:F56|talk]]) 13:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC).

* [[Heartbleed]] - Requesting importance reassessment. Originally assessed Top-importance in 2014 at height of coverage. [[WP:COMP]] have it rated Mid-importance (Top-importance for subproject [[WP:CSEC]]). [[User:FeRDNYC|FeRDNYC]] ([[User talk:FeRDNYC|talk]]) 02:07, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

* [[UK Web Archive]] Requesting a reassessment for this article, as it was recently moved and updated. Thanks :) [[User:Timeousbeastie|Timeousbeastie]] ([[User talk:Timeousbeastie|talk]]) 20:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

* [[Amazon Silk]] Hasn't been assessed for either importance or quality and I think it should be assessed considering it's been assessed by WikiProject Computing. It also needs to be improved but no one has said anything in the talk page about what needs to be fixed (besides me) so I feel like getting an assessment will allow those who wish to make it better to be able to do so by being able to see what needs to be improved. [[User:Blaze The Wolf|Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor]] ([[User talk:Blaze The Wolf#top|talk]]) 02:10, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

* [[History of the World Wide Web]] [[User:Brunnock|Sean Brunnock]] ([[User talk:Brunnock|talk]]) 18:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC). Recent extensive rewrite.

*[[.nrw_(domain)|.nrw (domain)]] [[User:Arotparaarms|Arotparaarms]] ([[User talk:Arotparaarms|talk]]) 21:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC). it took me A long time to re-write, I think it's a Start, am I wrong?



== Quality log ==

== Log ==

The [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Internet articles by quality log|full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days]] is available; due to its size (ca 100 kB), it cannot be transcluded directly.

{| class=toccolours align=right

| Internet articles:<br>{{WP1|Internet}}

|}

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

{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Internet articles by quality log}}



[[Category:WikiProject Internet|Assessment]]

[[Category:WikiProject Internet|Assessment]]


Latest revision as of 16:35, 20 March 2024

  • WP:INTERNET/A
  • Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Internet! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Internet 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.

    The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Internet}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Internet articles by quality and Category:Internet articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

    Frequently asked questions[edit]

    How can I get my article rated?
    Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
    Who can assess articles?
    Any member of the Internet WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
    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.
    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.
    Aren't the ratings subjective?
    Yes, they are, 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 the discussion page for this department.

    Instructions[edit]

    Quality assessment[edit]

    An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Internet}} project banner on its talk page: {{WikiProject Internet|class=???}}

    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 Internet articles)  FA
    A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Internet articles)  A
    GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Internet articles)  GA
    B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Internet articles) B
    C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Internet articles) C
    Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Internet articles) Start
    Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Internet articles) Stub
    FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Internet articles)  FL
    List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Internet 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 Internet articles) Category
    Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Internet articles) Disambig
    Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Internet articles) Draft
    FM (for featured media only; adds pages to Category:FM-Class Internet articles)  FM
    File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Internet articles) File
    Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Internet articles) Portal
    Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Internet articles) Project
    Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Internet articles) Redirect
    Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Internet articles) Template
    NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Internet articles) NA
    ??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Internet articles) ???

    Quality scale[edit]

    The scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.

  • e
  • Importance assessment[edit]

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

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

    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 the Internet.

    Note that general notability need not believe 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.

    Requesting an 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. Please note that an importance rating may not be given in some cases if the reviewer is unfamiliar with the subject.

    If you assess an article, please strike it off using <s>Strike-through text</s> so that other editors will not waste time going there too. Thanks!

    Submit new requests here:

    Log[edit]

    The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; due to its size (ca 100 kB), it cannot be transcluded directly.

    1. ^ For example, this image of the Battle of Normandy is grainy, but very few pictures of that event exist. However, where quite a number of pictures exist, for instance, the moon landing, FPC attempts to select the best of the ones produced.
  • ^ An image has more encyclopedic value (often abbreviated to "EV" or "enc" in discussions) if it contributes strongly to a single article, rather than contributing weakly to many. Adding an image to numerous articles to gain EV is counterproductive and may antagonize both FPC reviewers and article editors.
  • ^ While effects such as black and white, sepia, oversaturation, and abnormal angles may be visually pleasing, they often detract from the accurate depiction of the subject.

  • Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Internet/Assessment&oldid=1214701206"

    Categories: 
    WikiProject Internet
    WikiProject assessments
     



    This page was last edited on 20 March 2024, at 16:35 (UTC).

    Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



    Privacy policy

    About Wikipedia

    Disclaimers

    Contact Wikipedia

    Code of Conduct

    Developers

    Statistics

    Cookie statement

    Mobile view



    Wikimedia Foundation
    Powered by MediaWiki