Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Constitution

(Redirected from Wikipedia:COTUS)
WikiProject United States Constitution
ShortcutWP:COTUS
CategoryWikiProject United States Constitution
Project banner template{{WikiProject United States Constitution}}
AssessmentWikipedia:WikiProject United States Constitution/Assessment

Welcome to WikiProject United States Constitution on the English Wikipedia! We are a project dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the United States Constitution, with an emphasis on subjects with regional and national significance. This project was formed to coordinate the development of United States Constitution related articles and help maintain the United States Portal. Some project goals are to help list and categorize United States Constitution related articles, develop quality standards for articles and build templates that help users browse the articles that fall under this project. This project also provides a place for Wikipedians to share information and resources regarding improvements to United States Constitution related articles. Here, editors can ask for help with certain articles and bring otherwise overlooked articles and problems, to the attention of other editors. For more information of the role of WikiProjects, check out WikiProject guidelines.

This article is part of a series on the
Constitution
of the United States
Preamble and Articles
Amendments to the Constitution
Unratified Amendments:
History
Full text

Scope

edit

This Wikiproject is aimed at creating stronger coverage of this topic, and a greater quality and consistency among these articles. Key areas of concern include consistency in the type and style of information presented on documents and court cases related to the Constitution of the United States.

Guidelines

edit
  • No sub-specific guidelines independently exist for the project itself.
  • General Wikipedia-wide project guidelines apply, including:

Open tasks

edit

Add WikiProject templates to articles related to the United States Constitution. This includes the amendments, the framers, court cases related to the United States constitution, and events related to the United States constitution.

Article talk pages to add banner to: (If you have added it, please add the {{done}} template)

Delegates of the United States Constitutional Convention

(*) Did not sign the final draft of the U.S. Constitution. Randolph, Mason, and Gerry were the only three present in Philadelphia at the time who refused to sign.

Participants

edit

This section lists Wikipedia editors who have chosen to participate in WikiProject United States Constitution. Newcomers, please add your name to the list! Oldtimers, don't forget to welcome the newcomers to the fold. Remember, anyone can invite somebody. To stay updated on the project, put this page on your watchlist.

To add yourself to the list: if you're logged in, edit the list and put the following text at the end of the list for the current year: "* ~~~~" (leave the "quote marks" out) When you click "Save page," it'll fill in your user name & the time automatically.

Members on the active list may receive Collaboration of the Week and Meetup notices.

Users with   by their names are administrators on the English Wikipedia


Joined

edit
  1. CookieMonster755 (talk) 04:58, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  2. GregJackP Boomer! 00:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  3.   bd2412 T 01:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Winner 42 Talk to me! 01:10, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  5. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 04:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  6. — Cirt (talk) 21:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  7. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:16, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Coemgenus (talk) 13:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Vibrantmatter (talk) 07:25, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  10. CsikosLo (talk) 13:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Seraphimsystem (talk) 23:49, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Firstclass306 (talk) 22:01, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  13. ―Matthew J. Long -Talk-☖ 23:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Jamesharrison2014 (talk) 08:35, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Libertybison (talk) 22:55, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  16. OfficerCow (talk) 21:53, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

edit

Featured content

edit

Candidates

edit

Good articles

edit

New articles

edit

Please feel free to list your new United States Constitution-related articles here (newer articles at the top, please). Any new articles that have an interesting or unusual fact in them, are at least over 1,500 characters, don't have any dispute templates on them, and cite their sources, should be suggested for the Did you know? box on the Wikipedia Main Page.

Review and assessment

edit

Assessment

edit

An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject United States Constitution}} project banner on its talk page (see the template page for more details on the exact syntax):

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

The following values for the class parameter may be used:

These classes no longer need to be explicitly specified to the template. They are deduced by the namespace of the page the template is placed upon.

The following values for the importance parameter may be used:

Articles for which a class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed United States Constitution articles and articles for which an importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance United States Constitution articles. The class and importance should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

Quality scale

edit

The quality "class" an article receives should follow Wikipedia's regular guidelines for quality found below.

Articles which have not been formerly evaluated, or which have failed a good article review, should not be assigned a quality rating higher than B class. Above that an article needs to go through a formal review process.
WikiProject content quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
  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 Wikipedia's 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;
    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; and
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  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 footnotes—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 where appropriate.
 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. Cleopatra
(as of June 2018)
  FL The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates.
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.
  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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events
(as of May 2018)
  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. Battle of Nam River
(as of June 2014)
  GA The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations.
More detailed criteria
A good article is:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; 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. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or 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 non-free 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 (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. 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. Discovery of the neutron
(as of April 2019)
B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
More detailed 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 does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. 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. 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. Psychology
(as of January 2024)
C The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains 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, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
 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. Wing
(as of June 2018)
Start An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
  • A useful picture or graphic
  • Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
 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. Ball
(as of September 2014)
Stub A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. 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. Lineage (anthropology)
(as of December 2014)
List Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, 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 literary movements

Importance scale

edit
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. Kindergarten
 High Subject is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Factory Acts
 Mid Subject is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. 0.999...
 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. G cell
 NA Subject importance is not applicable. Generally applies to non-article pages such as redirects, categories, templates, etc. Category:Palms
 ??? Subject importance has not yet been assessed.

Peer review

edit
Peer review

Statistics

edit

Categories

edit
To display all subcategories click on the "►":
Constitution of the United States (9 C, 30 P)
American scholars of constitutional law (3 C, 119 P)
United States constitutional commentary (20 P)
Amendments to the United States Constitution (9 C, 21 P)
Articles of the United States Constitution (6 C, 7 P)
Clauses of the United States Constitution (2 C, 51 P)
Drafting of the United States Constitution (1 C, 20 P)
Constitution of the United States (featured picture set) (4 F)
United States constitutional law (7 C, 64 P)
Ratification of the United States Constitution (3 C, 14 P)

Templates

edit
Template Example
{{WikiProject United States Constitution}}
 United States Constitution Unassessed
 This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Constitution, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Constitution of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States ConstitutionWikipedia:WikiProject United States ConstitutionTemplate:WikiProject United States ConstitutionUnited States Constitution articles
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
This article has not yet been assigned a subject.
The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", and "Events."
{{User WikiProject United States Constitution}}
 This user participates in
WikiProject
United States Constitution.
{{WikiProject United States Constitution Welcome}}
 
Welcome to WikiProject United States Constitution! If you'd like, you can add the WP United States Constitution userbox to your user page using this code: {{User WikiProject United States Constitution}}. Check out the ongoing and archived discussions at WT:COTUS and be sure to add the page to your Watchlist. If you are new to Wikipedia, it's a good idea to browse through the core principles of Wikipedia as well. The project home page at WP:COTUS has many useful links to get you started. Welcome!
{{WikiProject United States Constitution invite}}
  You are invited to join WikiProject United States Constitution, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to the Constitution of the United States. You received this invitation because of your history editing the United States Constitution or United States law articles. The United States Constitution WikiProject group discussion is here. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of participants. New members may introduce themselves on the talk page.

Resources

edit
edit
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Constitution&oldid=1120083375"