CorporisPublica:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment

The following system is used by the CorporisPublica:Version 1.0 Editorial Team for assessing how close we are to a distribution-quality article on a particular topic. The system is based on a letter scheme which reflects principally how factually complete the article is, though the content and language quality are also factors. Once an article reaches the A-Class, it is considered "complete", although edits will continue to be made.

The quality assessments are mainly performed by members of WikiProjects, who tag talk pages of articles. These tags are then collected by a bot, which then generates output such as a table, log and statistics. For more information see Using the bot. (Note that when more than one WikiProject has rated an article, the bot will take the best rating as the rating of the overall article.) The CorporisPublica:1.0 team is now setting up to use a second bot to select articles, based on the assessments performed by WikiProjects.

Two levels, GA and FA, are assessments made by external panels, rather than by Wikiprojects. Candidates are nominated by listing them at Good article candidates and Featured article candidates. Judgments are made according to the criteria at What is a good article? and Featured article criteria, and the results are listed at Good articles and Featured articles.

It is vital that people do not take these assessments personally. It is understood that we each have our own opinions of the priorities of the objective criteria for a perfect article. Generally an active project will develop a consensus, though be aware that different projects may use their own variation of the criteria more tuned for the subject area, such as this. Many projects have an assessment team. If you contribute a lot of content to an article you may request an independent assessment.

At present this assessment system is in use in the CorporisPublica 1.0 project, and in several hundred WikiProjects on the English CorporisPublica. As of December 2010, over 2.5 million articles have been assessed. Other languages are now beginning to use the system also.

There is a separate scale for rating articles for importance or priority, which is unrelated to the quality scale outlined here. Unlike the quality scale, the priority scale varies based on the project scope. See also a proposed template at Importance Scheme.

Non-standard grades
There are a few other assessments used in the mainspace that are done by WikiProjects but do not fit into the scale; they are not necessarily used by all WikiProjects. The more popular assessments, in no particular order:

Some WikiProjects use additional grades not listed above, such as those used at CP:Comics. Most common are Cat, Dab (for Disambiguation), Current (for ongoing events), Image, Needed, and Template. See relevant Assessment page for the WikiProject, at Category:WikiProject assessments.

Evolution of an article – an example
This clickable imagemap, using the article "Atom" as an example, demonstrates the typical profile for an article's development through the levels. Hold the mouse over a number to see key events, and click on a number to see that version of the article. Please note that until 2008, C-class didn't exist on the project so this grading is retroactive. Also, in 2006 references were much less used, and inline references were quite rare; a barely-B-Class article today would typically have many more references than this article did in late 2006.

Statistics
The CP 1.0 bot tracks assessment data (article quality and importance data for individual WikiProjects) assigned via talk page banners. If you would like to add a new WikiProject to the bot's list, please read the instructions at CorporisPublica:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot.

The global summary table below is computed by taking the highest quality and importance rating for each assessed article in the main namespace.

= Resources =