Welcome to the assessment department of the Canada WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Canada 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 Canada|class= |importance= }} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Canada-related articles by quality and Category:Canada-related articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Canada-related articles by quality and importance |
Quality |
Importance |
Top |
High |
Mid |
Low |
NA |
??? |
Total |
FA |
2 |
19 |
56 |
48 |
|
|
125 |
FL |
2 |
24 |
23 |
48 |
|
|
97 |
A |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
GA |
4 |
30 |
130 |
350 |
|
|
514 |
B |
26 |
198 |
695 |
963 |
|
3 |
1,885 |
C |
9 |
126 |
722 |
2,384 |
|
25 |
3,266 |
Start |
1 |
314 |
5,618 |
26,041 |
|
284 |
32,258 |
Stub |
1 |
43 |
4,198 |
47,950 |
|
484 |
52,676 |
List |
1 |
78 |
857 |
2,917 |
1 |
|
3,854 |
Future |
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
2 |
Book |
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
60 |
Category |
|
|
|
|
20,368 |
|
20,368 |
Disambig |
|
|
|
|
459 |
|
459 |
File |
|
|
|
|
325 |
|
325 |
Portal |
|
|
|
|
252 |
|
252 |
Project |
|
|
|
|
114 |
|
114 |
Redirect |
|
|
|
|
9,681 |
1 |
9,682 |
Template |
|
|
|
|
4,252 |
|
4,252 |
NA |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
2 |
Other |
|
|
|
2 |
29 |
|
31 |
Assessed |
46 |
832 |
12,300 |
80,705 |
35,543 |
797 |
130,223 |
Unassessed |
|
|
|
8 |
|
557 |
565 |
Total |
46 |
832 |
12,300 |
80,713 |
35,543 |
1,354 |
130,788 |
WikiWork factors (?) |
ω = 7005478834000000000♠478,834 |
Ω = 5.49 |
|
Canada articles:
Index · Statistics · Log |
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 Canada 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 assessments[edit]
An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Canada}} project banner on its talk page:
- {{WikiProject Canada|class=???}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Quality scale for assessment criteria):
For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:
Quality scale[edit]
WikiProject article quality grading scheme
Class |
Criteria |
Reader's experience |
Editing suggestions |
Example |
FA |
The article has attained featured article status by passing an official review.
More detailed criteria |
The article meets the featured article criteria:
A featured article exemplifies our 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.
- It is—
- well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
- comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
- 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;
- neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and
- 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.
- It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of—
- a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
- appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents; and
- consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes (<ref>Smith 2007, p. 1.</ref>) or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1)—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. The use of citation templates is not required.
- Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions, and acceptable copyright status. Images included follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
- Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style.
|
|
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. |
Canada |
A |
The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from this 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. Peer review may help. |
Hurricane Arthur (2014) |
GA |
The article has attained good article status by passing an official review.
More detailed criteria |
The article meets the good article criteria:
A good article is—
- Well written:
- the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
- it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
- Verifiable with no original research:
- it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;
- it contains no original research; and
- it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
- Broad in its coverage:
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
- it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- Illustrated, if possible, by images:
- images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
- images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
|
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (but not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. |
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. |
Canadians |
B |
The article is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
More detailed criteria |
The article meets the six B-Class criteria:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
- The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
- The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, 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 also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. |
History of Canada |
C |
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains much 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; 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. It is most likely that C-Class articles have a reasonable encyclopedic style. |
|
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. |
Law of Canada |
Start |
An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete. It might or might not cite adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria |
The article has a usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent. The article should satisfy fundamental content policies, such as BLP. Frequently, the referencing is inadequate, although enough sources are usually provided to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted. |
|
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. |
Canadian Human Rights Act |
Stub |
A very basic description of the topic. However, all very-bad-quality articles will fall into this category.
More detailed criteria |
The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short; but, if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category. Although Stub-class articles are the lowest class of the normal classes, they are adequate enough to be an accepted article, though they do have risks of being dropped from being an article all together. |
|
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. |
Industry Canada |
FL |
The article has attained featured list status.
More detailed criteria |
The article meets the featured list criteria:
- Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
- Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
- Comprehensiveness.
- (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items.
- (b) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article.
- Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
- Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
- 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. |
List of Prime Ministers of Canada |
List |
Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, 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 Companions of the Order of Canada |
Book |
A collection of Wikipedia articles arranged as a book (see Wikipedia Books).
|
People who would like to read Wikipedia offline, or in print. |
It is a good idea to team up with a relevant WikiProject to gather feedback on books. |
Book:Canada |
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:Canada |
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. |
Canadian (disambiguation) |
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 Canada.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:Canada |
Project |
All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class. |
Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development, and are probably not useful to readers. |
Develop these pages into collaborative resources useful for improving articles within the project. |
Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada |
Redirect |
Any redirect falls under this class. |
The page redirects to another article with a similar name, related topic or that has been merged 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. |
Canadian federal election |
Template |
Any template falls under this class. The most common types of template include infoboxes and navboxes. |
Different types of template 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:Canada topics |
Importance assessment[edit]
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Canada}} project banner on its talk page:
- {{WikiProject Canada|importance=???}}
The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project:
The importance parameter should be assigned according to the importance scale below.
Note that the four city projects have their own importance scales. To rate the importance of an article for a city project, use the parameters |toronto-importance=???, |montreal-importance=???, |vancouver-importance=???, or |ottawa-importance=???.
Importance scale[edit]
Label |
Criteria |
Reader's experience |
Editor's experience |
Example |
Top |
The article is one of the core topics about Canada. Generally, this is limited to those articles that are listed on {{Canada topics}} |
A reader who is not involved in Canada will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily. |
Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages. |
Government of Canada, Culture of Canada, British Columbia |
High |
The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding specific topics about Canada or general topics about parts of Canada |
Most readers will have some knowledge of the subject |
Articles at this level cover particular issues related to Canada, specific terms are used to detail the topic |
Prime Minister of Canada, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, History of Manitoba |
Mid |
The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in Canada. |
Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject |
Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand Canada. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text. |
Minister of Transport (Canada), Rick Mercer, Jasper National Park |
Low |
The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of Canada, but may cover topics directly related to Canada. |
Few readers outside of Canada or that are not within the local area of the article's topic may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article. |
Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of Canada, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed. |
Todd Russell, Canada's grand railway hotels, Villages of Alberta, OpenBSD |
Requesting an assessment[edit]
Note: an archive of requests for assessment can be found here.
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 add it to the bottom of the following list.
-
- I kept the assessment of Sherbrooke as C class, but it's not far off "B". Left some notes on its talk page for interested editors to clean up. PKT(alk) 17:01, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- I've been working on expanding some stubs that are now in need of a review. I'm a new editor so if you're willing, I would also appreciate any feedback you have if you have the time.
Kilgore89 (talk) 01:56, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
- Lillian Bilsky Freiman was recently fixed-up. I created the article a while back, but the article is neither included in this project, nor is it assessed for importance and quality. Thank you, Tradereddy (talk) 14:32, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- I am a newer editor. I have significantly expanded the Riding Mountain National Park article and would appreciate if it could be reassessed. Thank you!Trek104 (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC) Just an update, I took the initiative to change the rating from stub class to start as it is definitely not a stub anymore. I will leave it to another editor to assess whether it should be rated higher than start class. Thanks! Trek104 (talk) 02:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Assessments in other Canada-related projects[edit]
Project |
Aprox.
size |
Statistics |
WikiProject Canada banner |
Independent banner |
WikiProject Ontario |
20,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |on=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Quebec |
11,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |qc=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Nova Scotia |
4,500 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |ns=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject New Brunswick |
3,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |nb=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Manitoba |
4,300 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |mb=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject British Columbia |
11,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |bc=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Prince Edward Island |
1,300 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |pe=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Saskatchewan |
5,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |sk=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Alberta |
9,500 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |ab=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador |
2,700 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |nl=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Toronto |
7,800 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |toronto=yes |toronto-importance=}} |
{{WikiProject Toronto}} (3 transclusions) |
WikiProject Montreal |
3,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |montreal=yes |montreal-importance=}} |
{{WikiProject Montreal}} (1,000 transclusions) |
WikiProject Vancouver |
2,200 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |vancouver=yes |vancouver-importance=}} |
{{WikiProject Vancouver}} (880 transclusions) |
WikiProject Ottawa |
2,100 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |ottawa=yes |ottawa-importance=}} |
{{WikiProject Ottawa}} (1,300 transclusions) |
WikiProject Canadian Territories |
3,300 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |yt=yes}}
{{WikiProject Canada |nt=yes}}
{{WikiProject Canada |nu=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Governments of Canada |
2,700 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |cangov=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada |
9,300 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |ppap=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada |
2,500 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |riding=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Canadian law |
1,300 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |canlaw=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject History of Canada |
1,500 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |history=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Geography of Canada |
18,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |geography=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Canadian communities |
17,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |community=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Education in Canada |
3,700 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |education=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Canadian sport |
8,500 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |sport=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Canadian TV shows |
2,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |tvshow=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject Canadian music |
10,000 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |music=yes}} |
deleted |
Kawartha Lakes taskforce |
100 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |kawartha-lakes=yes}} |
none |
WikiProject Saskatchewan communities and neighbourhoods |
1,500 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |sk=yes |community=yes}} |
deleted |
WikiProject St. John's |
250 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |stjohns=yes}} |
none |
Projects and taskforces outside the scope of WikiProject Canada's talk page banner |
WikiProject Film/Canadian cinema task force |
2,800 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |cinema=yes}}
NB: only adds a link, does not assess |
{{WikiProject Film|Canadian-task-force=yes}} |
WikiProject Military history/Canadian military history task force |
2,800 |
stats |
{{WikiProject Canada |military=yes}}
NB: only adds a link, does not assess |
{{WPMILHIST|Canadian-task-force=yes}} |
WikiProject Canada Roads |
2,300 |
stats |
none |
{{Canada Roads WikiProject}} |
WikiProject Canadian football |
3,600 |
stats |
none |
{{WikiProject Canadian football}} |
WikiProject Prescott-Russell |
36 |
none |
none |
{{WikiProject Prescott-Russell}} |
WikiProject Degrassi |
180 |
stats |
none |
{{WikiProject Degrassi}} |
WikiProject Okanagan |
530 |
stats |
none |
{{WikiProject Okanagan}} |
See also[edit]
|