• 1.3% List-Class
  • 36.2% Stub-Class
  • 49.9% Start-Class
  • 8.8% C-Class
  • 2.4% B-Class
  • 1% GA-Class
  • 0.3% FA-Class

This is the WikiProject Louisville Assessment department, which focuses on 1) assessing the quality of, and 2) assigning project importance to, Wikipedia's Louisville area-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.

As of 17 April 2024, there are 6,900 articles within the scope of WikiProject Louisville, of which 18 are featured and 68 are good articles. This makes up 0.1% of the articles on Wikipedia, 0.17% of all featured articles and lists, and 0.17% of all good articles. Including non-article pages, such as talk pages, redirects, categories, etcetera, there are 21,378 pages in the project.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in our project banner:
{{WikiProject United States|class=|Louisville=yes|Louisville-importance=}}

When placed on an article's talk page, this causes the article to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Louisville articles by quality and Category:Louisville articles by importance, whether you do an assessment or not.

Note: Sometimes an article will already have {{WikiProject United States}} on its talk page to accommodate other projects. In that case, simply add the following parameters to it:

|Louisville=yes|Louisville-importance=

Frequently asked questions edit

How can I get my article rated?
As a participant in WikiProject Louisville's efforts, listed or not, you can do it yourself. Follow the above directions for placing the project banner on its talk page and optionally, assess—if you choose not to assess, the article will automatically be listed under Category:Unassessed Louisville articles and someone involved in the project will eventually attend to its assessment. If you are unsure how to assess and want speedier assistance, or it is an article you changed since its last assessment and want it to be reassessed by somebody else, you may list it in the requesting an assessment section below.
Who can assess articles?
Any participant in WikiProject Louisville, listed or not, is free to add or change the rating of an article, but please follow the guidelines.
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 comments about my article?
You may ask any listed participant of the project their opinion, or make such a request on our project's talk page. You may also list it for a peer review (note: this is operated outside our project).
What if I don't agree with a rating?
Request a reassessment for the article as described above. Alternately, you can ask any listed participant of the project to rate the article again. Also, don't forget that you can reassess the article yourself.
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!

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on our project's talk 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=???|Louisville=yes}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class Louisville articles)   FA
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Louisville articles)   GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Louisville articles) B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Louisville articles) C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Louisville articles) Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Louisville articles) Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Louisville articles)   FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Louisville articles) List

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class Louisville articles) Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Louisville articles) Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Louisville articles) Draft
FM (for featured media only; adds pages to Category:FM-Class Louisville articles)   FM
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Louisville articles) File
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Louisville articles) Project
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class Louisville articles) Redirect
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Louisville articles) Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Louisville articles) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Louisville articles) ???
Note
  • After assessing an article's quality, any comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

Quality scale edit

Importance assignment edit

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

{{WikiProject United States| ... | Louisville-importance=??? | ...}}
Top
High
Mid
Low
???

The following values may be used for importance assignments:

Importance scale edit

Label Criteria Examples
Top Core topics about Louisville. Generally, these topics are sub-articles of the main Louisville article, vital for the understanding of Louisville or extremely notable to people outside of Louisville. This category should stay limited to approximately 100 members. Biographies should be limited to the top one or two Louisvillians in a particular field or persons of the greatest historical importance. History of Louisville, Kentucky or
Muhammad Ali
High Topics that are very notable within Louisville, and well-known outside of it, and can be reasonably expected to be included in any print encyclopedia. Jeffersontown, Kentucky or
Thunder Over Louisville
Mid Topics that are reasonably notable on a local level within Louisville without necessarily being famous or very notable outside of Louisville. Colonial Gardens or
Shawnee Park
Low Topics of mostly local interest or those that are only included for complete coverage or as examples of a higher-level topic; peripheral or trivial topics or topics that have only a limited connection to Louisville. Bacon's or
Jim Porter (giant)

Requesting an assessment or re-assessment edit

To submit an article for assessment or inclusion in WikiProject Louisville, please add it to the request list.

Articles may be submitted or re-submitted at any time. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use Wikipedia's peer review department instead.

Assessment log edit

Louisville articles:
Index · Statistics · Log

The assessment log and other pages on the right are generated automatically on a daily basis; please don't add entries to them by hand.

References edit

  1. ^ For example, this image of the Battle of Normandy is grainy, but very few pictures of that event exist. However, where quite a number of pictures exist, for instance, the moon landing, FPC attempts to select the best of the ones produced.
  2. ^ An image has more encyclopedic value (often abbreviated to "EV" or "enc" in discussions) if it contributes strongly to a single article, rather than contributing weakly to many. Adding an image to numerous articles to gain EV is counterproductive and may antagonize both FPC reviewers and article editors.
  3. ^ While effects such as black and white, sepia, oversaturation, and abnormal angles may be visually pleasing, they often detract from the accurate depiction of the subject.