Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:05, 21 June 2008

Skip to current requests for assessment

Template:WPCVG Template:WPCVG Sidebar

• WP:CVG/A

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Video games! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Misplaced Pages's video games 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, and more specifically in the Video games essential articles page.

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Video games}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Video game articles by quality, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

FAQ

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 Misplaced Pages 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages as a whole.

2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject?

Just add {{WikiProject Video games}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Video games}} 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 Video games 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. Can I request that someone else rate an article?

Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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!

10. 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.

11. What is the difference between video games assessment and general assessment?

At WikiProject Video games, we do things a little different than normal assessment. You will find most of the below in other sections as well, but this is a summary for those familiar with the assessment procedure in general.

• We do not use list-class, and rate lists on the article assessment scale. Many of our lists are closer to articles than lists in other projects, and sometimes the line between list an article is ambiguous.
• Our A-class rating is awarded with the informal agreement that two editors agree with the rating of A-class.
• Comments and suggestions are usually placed as a list on the talk page of the article, not here.
• We have some specific standards based upon the guidelines, see the table below.

Assessment instructions

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

{{WikiProject Video games| ... | class=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class video game articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as featured articles)
• Template:A-classicon A (adds articles to Category:A-Class video game articles; should be agreed upon by two independent reviewers
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class video game articles; should only be used for articles that are currently listed as good articles)
• Template:B-classicon B (adds articles to Category:B-Class video game articles)
• Template:Start-classicon Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class video game articles)
• Template:Stub-classicon Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class video game articles)
• Template:List-classicon List (adds articles to Category:List-Class video game articles)
• Template:NA-classicon NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary)

Note that lists are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status.

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed video game articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Quality scale

Article progress grading scheme

Label	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editor's experience	Example
FA {{FA-Class}}	Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, and meet the current criteria for featured articles.	Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information.	No further additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible.	Final Fantasy Tactics Cortana Wii
A {{A-Class}}	Provides a complete description of the topic, and contains all information that is normally expected of an article like it. Complies with all of the project guidelines, and most of the featured article guidelines. Should be well referenced, and include no excessive information. May miss a few details, and have some problems with the prose, for example with gaming jargon and in universe perspective. Could be considered for featured article status.	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points.	Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage.	Silent Hill 4: The Room Characters of StarCraft MMORPG
GA {{GA-Class}}	The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. Good articles in the video games project's scope often still need work meeting project guidelines. Having completed the Good article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class.	Useful to most readers. A good treatment of the subject, but may lack information in some areas. Can contain excessive information and violate standards.	Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. Further improvements may require outside comments, for example through an assessment. Now is the time to work on details such as the proper use of citation templates.	World of Warcraft Dante Clannad
B {{B-Class}}	The highest article grade that can be assigned by a single reviewer from WikiProject Video games. Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. May contain stub sections and excessive information and lists. Contains at least a few reliable, third party references, but some text may be unverifiable.	Useful to many, but not all, readers. The reader doing in-depth research may find some points missing, and the layperson may be confronted with excessive information only useful to fans.	Considerable editing is still needed, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors. Cleanup may be needed, and a close look at the video games guidelines and featured article guidelines will help with identifying problems.	Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
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. Usually treats the gameplay of a game well, but lacks information on the reception and development of the game. Articles on fiction typically do not contain enough real world information on the subject.	Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded.	Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. Reliable sources need to be found.	Age of Empires III: The WarChiefs
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. The article is usually very short, but may contain a lot of irrelevant lists and other inappropriate material.	Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful.	Mario Kart Arcade GP 2

Current status

Video game articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	Total
FA	2	66	104	113		285
FL		1	3	98		102
GA	7	122	520	1,587		2,236
B	20	154	395	1,335		1,904
C	34	322	1,162	4,843	1	6,362
Start		66	640	20,519		21,225
Stub			37	8,288	1	8,326
List			80	1,363	1	1,444
Category					10,611	10,611
Disambig					160	160
File					39,765	39,765
Portal					9	9
Project					357	357
Redirect					15,148	15,148
Template					2,020	2,020
Other					39	39
Draft					439	439
Assessed	63	731	2,941	38,146	68,551	110,432
Unassessed				1	1	2
Total	63	731	2,941	38,147	68,552	110,434
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 191,706			Ω = 4.75

Assessment Tools

The process of going through unassessed articles can become mundane quickly. To speed up the process you can use the Kingbotk plugin for the AutoWikiBrowser if you are running Windows 2K/XP. This tool requires admin approval (generally, only users with over 500 edits in the mainspace are accepted) before a user can make edits with the tool. After approval, the Kingbotk plugin can be setup to make assessments with the {{cvgproj}} tag. For futher details on installation and setup visit the pages for AutoWikiBrowser, Kingbotk plugin, and Generic WikiProject templates.

Another tool that helps with assessing articles is Metadatatest.js, which does not require any external software.

Log

A full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.

Requests for assessment

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. Note that while the formal process for attaining an A-rating is currently not active, it is recommended that at least two assessors agree on rating an article as A-class before declaring it as such.

New requests

1. Super Smash Bros. Brawl - rated GA-class, high-importance; would like rating to go to A, but if it is not possible, then please provide a nice assessment summary about what needs to be fixed to achieve that. Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 02:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
2. PlayStation Store - rated Start-class, low priority. Would like B class to be considered after a fairly major tidy-up. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 20:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
3. WayForward Technologies - rated Start-Class, low priority. I've previously prodded this and nominated it for AfD. Since new sources have come to light, I feel duty-bound to improve the article from it's former stub. Gazimoff _Read 20:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
4. Maressa Orzack, finally expanded from that stub. All input gratefully received! Gazimoff _Read 21:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
5. Conan (2007 video game) - rated Start-class, Low-importance. Greatly cleaned up and expanded. Concurrent GA nomination. All reasonable critiques appreciated. Jappalang (talk) 05:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
6. Gameplay of World of Warcraft New article - still working the others in the WoW series around it, but would be glad to get some feedback on it! Gazimoff _Read 22:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Archive

This month's completed assessments are listed below. Older assessments can be found in the archive.

1. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess - promoted to A-class by User:Haha169, stays high importance -- igordebraga ≠ 18:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
2. Eschalon: Book I - promoted to start-class. More info on article's talk page.--haha169 (talk) 03:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
3. Penguin Chat - remained stub class low importance. Someoneanother 23:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

• WikiProject Video games
• WikiProject assessments