Mountain articles by quality and importance | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Quality | Importance | ||||||
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
4 | 5 | 17 | 9 | 35 | |||
1 | 1 | 2 | |||||
12 | 9 | 49 | 57 | 127 | |||
B | 33 | 25 | 76 | 110 | 43 | 287 | |
C | 61 | 67 | 246 | 480 | 65 | 919 | |
Start | 76 | 136 | 1,003 | 6,665 | 112 | 7,992 | |
Stub | 20 | 83 | 850 | 20,190 | 79 | 21,222 | |
List | 4 | 12 | 159 | 316 | 34 | 20 | 545 |
Category | 3,042 | 3,042 | |||||
Disambig | 165 | 165 | |||||
File | 167 | 167 | |||||
Portal | 3 | 3 | |||||
Project | 20 | 20 | |||||
Template | 9 | 212 | 221 | ||||
NA | 1 | 36 | 2,504 | 403 | 2,944 | ||
Other | 1 | 26 | 27 | ||||
Assessed | 210 | 338 | 2,446 | 30,333 | 4,072 | 319 | 37,718 |
Total | 210 | 338 | 2,446 | 30,333 | 4,072 | 319 | 37,718 |
WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 172,083 | Ω = 5.63 |
Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Mountains. This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles about mountains. 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 Mountains}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Mountain articles by quality and Category:Mountain articles by importance.
Frequently asked questions
edit- How can I get my article rated?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- Who can assess articles?
- Any member of the Mountains WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
- 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, 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!
If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.
Instructions
editAn article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Mountains}} or {{Mountain}} project banner on its talk page:
{{WikiProject Mountains
|class=
|importance=
|needs-photo=
|needs-infobox=
}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter. The value is not case-sensitive so for example, Start or start can be used.
- FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Mountain articles)
- A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Mountain articles)
- GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Mountain articles)
- B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Mountain articles)
- C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Mountain articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Mountain articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Mountain articles)
- List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Mountain articles)
- Disambig or Dab (adds articles to Category:Disambig-Class Mountain articles)
- Category (adds articles to Category:Category-Class Mountain articles)
- NA (for pages, such as templates, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Mountain articles)
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Mountain articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
Quality scale
editClass | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Level Mountain | |
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. | List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018) |
|
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. | Mount Vesuvius | |
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. | Ben Nevis | |
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. | Mount Everest |
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:
|
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. | Mount Logan |
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. | Mount K2 |
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
editAn article's importance assessment is shown by the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Mountains}} project banner on its talk page:
- {{WikiProject Mountains| ... | importance=??? | ...}}
The following values may be used for importance assessments:
Status | Category | Meaning of Status |
---|---|---|
Top | Category:Top-importance Mountain articles | This article is of the utmost importance to this project. Globally important mountains such as the highest peaks of major ranges, or generally high or prominent in their continent (so all of the Seven Summits or Seven Second Summits) or otherwise internationally notable or renowned peaks for climbing, cultural or historic reasons. Major ranges of the world (sub ranges only included when particularly noteworthy and usually only if parent is not included). Other core mountain topics. |
High | Category:High-importance Mountain articles | This article is fairly important to this project. Mountains which are the high points of lesser ranges; additional major summits of major ranges or geographic areas; country high points (not listed as Top importance but that are proper mountains (roughly at least 1000m high, 300m prominence)); other peaks notable for climbing, cultural or historic reasons for a more specialized or regional audience. Significant mountain ranges, sub ranges of major world ranges. |
Mid | Category:Mid-importance Mountain articles | This article is relatively important to this project. Significant peaks in mountain ranges generally fall into this class, as do well known minor peaks, and high points of countries which are not proper mountains. Other topics likely to be of some important to specialist readers. |
Low | Category:Low-importance Mountain articles | The mountain/peak is typically not well known even among mountaineers and is not a significant summit within its mountain range (if contained in such). Other topics likely to be of limited interest even to specialist readers. |
NA | Category:NA-importance Mountain articles | This article has no importance (as it pertains to article improvement) and is typically used for categories and disambiguation pages. |
None | None | This article is of unknown importance to this project. It remains to be analyzed. |
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 mountains.
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 several audiences — but which are of high notability to particular, material audiences — should still be highly rated.
Requesting an assessment
editIf 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.
- Simcoe Mountains
- Tibesti Mountains
- Appalachian Mountains
- Mount Oglethorpe
- Hightower Bald
- Springer Mountain
- Taburno Camposauro
- Ben Lomond Tasmania
- Mont Buet - Wrote a full entry on Mont Buet, focusing on the history of the first ascents and scientific expeditions. There are a few mistakes on the French page which need to be corrected (such as the date of the first ascent, the altitude etc.). Hist Facts (talk) 13:13, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Assessment log
editMountain articles: Index · Statistics · Log |
- 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.
September 1, 2024
editRenamed
edit- Dog Peak, Accursed Mountains renamed to Dog's Peak.
Reassessed
edit- Nahta Cone (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Çuka Partizani (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
edit- Anne Hill, Antarctica (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Dog's Peak (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
Removed
editAugust 31, 2024
editReassessed
edit- Maebongsan (Inje) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
- Maebongsan (Wonju and Yeongwol) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
- Maebongsan (Yeongwol) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
- Taehwasan (Gangwon and North Chungcheong) (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from NA-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
edit- Thunderbird Mesa (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
August 30, 2024
editAssessed
edit- Gray Whiskers (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Thowar (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
August 29, 2024
editRenamed
edit- Osikový vrch renamed to Javorový vrch.
Assessed
edit- Javorový vrch (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Medvědí hora (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ucháč (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Uthiyur Hills (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Červená hora (Hrubý Jeseník) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
August 28, 2024
editAssessed
edit- Jabal Qada'ah (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Lyra (mountain) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Osikový vrch (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Ubla mountains (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
August 27, 2024
editRenamed
edit- Draft:Darlington Range renamed to Darlington Range.
Reassessed
edit- Mount Negron (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
edit- Mount Banoy (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Orlík (mountain) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Rain God Mesa (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Spearhead Mesa (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
- Černá stráň (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as B-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
August 26, 2024
editReassessed
edit- Hills and mountains in Meitei culture (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to NA-Class. (rev · t)