Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Assessment
Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Japan! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Japan-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 Japan}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Japan-related articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
You can jump down to get an article assessed.
Japan-related articles by quality statistics
editJapan-related articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
FA | 5 | 42 | 51 | 45 | 143 | ||
FL | 13 | 6 | 16 | 35 | |||
FM | 126 | 126 | |||||
A | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 | |||
GA | 8 | 50 | 120 | 350 | 528 | ||
B | 60 | 250 | 713 | 1,010 | 68 | 2,101 | |
C | 95 | 652 | 1,814 | 4,167 | 1 | 327 | 7,056 |
Start | 31 | 1,067 | 7,393 | 27,478 | 1,164 | 37,133 | |
Stub | 125 | 3,632 | 37,445 | 2,878 | 44,080 | ||
List | 7 | 83 | 525 | 1,974 | 71 | 200 | 2,860 |
Category | 1 | 3 | 67 | 20,212 | 20,283 | ||
Disambig | 11 | 584 | 595 | ||||
File | 11 | 354 | 365 | ||||
Portal | 144 | 144 | |||||
Project | 1 | 157 | 158 | ||||
Redirect | 18 | 181 | 883 | 1,971 | 3,053 | ||
Template | 1 | 3 | 3 | 87 | 2,218 | 2,312 | |
NA | 2 | 7 | 37 | 11 | 57 | ||
Other | 7 | 167 | 174 | ||||
Assessed | 207 | 2,308 | 14,450 | 73,591 | 26,016 | 4,637 | 121,209 |
Unassessed | 1 | 20 | 341 | 362 | |||
Total | 207 | 2,308 | 14,451 | 73,611 | 26,016 | 4,978 | 121,571 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 485,728 | Ω = 5.33 |
Frequently asked questions
edit- How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
- Just add {{WikiProject Japan}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
- Someone put the template on an article, but it's not a Japan related topic. 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).
- What is the purpose of the article ratings?
- The objective of the rating system is twofold. First, it allows the project to monitor the quality of the articles within our scope and to prioritize work on these articles. Second, the ratings will be used by the Wikipedia 1.0 project to compile a "released version" of Wikipedia that can be distributed to readers. Please note, however, that these ratings are meant for the internal use of the project, and do not imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
- Who can assess articles?
- Any member of WikiProject Japan 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. Editors should also note that assessments of B or A require project consensus, while GA, FA, and FL assessments have associated formal review processes that must be followed.
- How do I rate an article?
- Check the assessment scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article, then follow the guidelines 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.
- How can I make a request for someone from the project to assess an article?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- 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.
- Where can I get more details or feedback about an article?
- The peer review process is one that results in a more thorough examination of articles; to ensure project members also view the article, make sure to list it at our peer review page.
- 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 (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!
- What about lists?
- Lists of various kinds are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status. Lists which are pure lists of links, however, should be assessed as list class, as they have no real content to be evaluated.
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.
Assessment scales
editQuality scale
editThe scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.
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.
|
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. | Japan (as of March 2009) More examples Toilets in Japan |
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:
|
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. | Tallest buildings and structures in Tokyo (as of March 2009) More examples Japanese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film |
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. | Japanese battleship Haruna (as of March 2009) More examples Tengu |
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:
|
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. | Matsuo Bashō (as of March 2009) More examples ASIMO |
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
|
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. | Akihabara massacre (as of March 2009) More examples Demographics of Japan |
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. | Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (as of March 2009) More examples History of Japan |
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:
|
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. | Onyanko Club (as of March 2009) More examples 400 Series Shinkansen |
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. | 36 Views of Mount Fuji (Hokusai) (as of March 2009) More examples Gjiten |
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 volcanoes in Japan (as of March 2009)
More examples Zepp |
These criteria apply to general-content articles. The manual of style provides additional guidelines about what sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.
Each Japan-related article has its assessment included within the {{WikiProject Japan}} template, such as {{WikiProject Japan|class=B}}. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Japan-related articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.
B-Class criteria
editSpecial emphasis is given to the six criteria that B-Class articles for the WikiProject should meet:
B |
|
Importance scale
editPriority (or importance) must be regarded as a relative term. If priority values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the article falls under. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority 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).
Type | Top | High | Mid | Low |
---|---|---|---|---|
Definition | Core topics (e.g., Japan, Shinto, History of Japan). Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia. High probability that non-Japanophiles would look this up. Must have had a large impact outside of Japan and be known in the majority of the world. For example, Sushi is very popular worldwide and known in most of the world. No member should give this rating to any article without first getting Project approval from the other members. | Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopedia. Must have had a large impact in Japan, and had some impact outside Japan, as well as sub-articles of core topics (e.g., Edo period, Yasukuni Shrine). | Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Important in Japan, but not necessarily known as well outside of Japan. (e.g., Sakurajima, Recycling in Japan). | This article is of little importance as it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia. |
Requests for assessment
editPlease refer to this page when determining if an article meets the individual B-Class criteria checklist items.
- Graduate School of Management, Globis University - Article was improved significantly. Could I ask someone to reassess the current "Start" rating? I believe it should be good enough for a C, perhaps even a B. Thank you! Furoba (talk) 09:32, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
- Sandaime J Soul Brothers - This article has been considerably expanded on and improved since the last time it was assessed. I strongly believe it can be updated for a B rating. Thank you. Takacchin10_10 (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- sports in Japan I don’t know when this article was last assessed or if has ever been assessed but it’s of top class importance and seems well flushed out so I believe it’s deserving of a higher rating although I can not say that I am a contributor towards it but it seems silly for it to stay as such an important article and yet be rated so low
Thanks Goldsoldier75 (talk) 16:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
AKB48 I believe it is worthy of between B and A class as it is very very well researched and well written and it’s considered of high importance and is a good enough article that in my humble opinion may one day in the not so far future be worthy of a ga or even fa Thanks Goldsoldier75 (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Requests for external assessment
editDid you know
- 24 Aug 2024 – Daiki Kobayashi (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Miraclepine (t · c); see discussion
- 23 Aug 2024 – Typhoon Virginia (1957) (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by TheNuggeteer (t · c); see discussion
- 18 Aug 2024 – Umehara ga kimeta (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by 狄の用務員 (t · c); see discussion
- 17 Aug 2024 – Shoko Ikeda (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Miraclepine (t · c); see discussion
- 14 Aug 2024 – Jyocho (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by TechnoSquirrel69 (t · c); see discussion
- 13 Aug 2024 – Statue of Yakushi Nyorai (Jingo-ji) (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by NeverBeGameOver (t · c); see discussion
- 05 Aug 2024 – Kimi wa Bara yori Utsukushī (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by IanTEB (t · c); see discussion
- 03 Aug 2024 – MV Don Claudio (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by TheNuggeteer (t · c); see discussion
- 02 Aug 2024 – Premna microphylla (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Awkwafaba (t · c); see discussion
- 30 Jul 2024 – Military-First Girls (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Yue (t · c); see discussion
- (2 more...)
Featured article candidates
- 25 Aug 2024 – You Only Live Twice (novel) (talk · edit · hist) was FA nominated by SchroCat (t · c); see discussion
- 21 Aug 2024 – Godzilla Minus One (talk · edit · hist) was FA nominated by Eiga-Kevin2 (t · c); see discussion
- 04 Aug 2024 – Battle of Saipan (talk · edit · hist) was FA nominated by Wtfiv (t · c); see discussion
A-Class review
- undated – Miyoshi Nagayoshi (talk · edit · hist) was put up for A-Class review
Good article nominees
- 19 Aug 2024 – Pokémon Heroes (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Pokelego999 (t · c); start discussion
- 19 Aug 2024 – I Wanna Be Your Ghost (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by IanTEB (t · c); start discussion
- 17 Aug 2024 – Fukushima nuclear accident (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Czarking0 (t · c); start discussion
- 30 Jul 2024 – Life Cycle (Sakerock album) (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by IanTEB (t · c); start discussion
- 29 Jul 2024 – Shin Megami Tensei V (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by ProtoDrake (t · c); start discussion
- 26 Jun 2024 – Shibayama Railway (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by AlphaBetaGamma (t · c); see discussion
- 01 Jun 2024 – Why (Gen Hoshino song) (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by IanTEB (t · c); start discussion
- 28 May 2024 – Frieren (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by KjjjKjjj (t · c); start discussion
- 20 May 2024 – Donkey Kong (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by TheJoebro64 (t · c); start discussion
- 24 Apr 2024 – Sonny Boy (TV series) (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by HallyTall (t · c); start discussion
- (1 more...)
Good article reassessments
- 16 Aug 2024 – Asia League Ice Hockey (talk · edit · hist) nominated for GA reassessment by AirshipJungleman29 (t · c) was closed; see discussion
Log
editA full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.