Welcome to the assessment department of the Skepticism WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Skepticism 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 Skepticism}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Skepticism articles by quality and Category:Skepticism articles by importance, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
Frequently asked questions
- 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 Skepticism WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article.
- 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.
- 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
Quality assessments
An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Skepticism}} project banner on its talk page: {{WikiProject Skepticism|class=???}}
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 Skepticism articles) | FA | |
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Skepticism articles) | A | |
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Skepticism articles) | GA | |
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Skepticism articles) | B | |
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Skepticism articles) | C | |
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Skepticism articles) | Start | |
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Skepticism articles) | Stub | |
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Skepticism articles) | FL | |
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Skepticism 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 Skepticism articles) | Category | |
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Skepticism articles) | Disambig | |
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class Skepticism articles) | Draft | |
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class Skepticism articles) | File | |
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class Skepticism articles) | Portal | |
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class Skepticism articles) | Project | |
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class Skepticism articles) | Template | |
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Skepticism articles) | NA | |
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Skepticism articles) | ??? |
After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.
Quality scale
Importance assessment
An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Skepticism}} project banner on its talk page:
The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):
Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance Skepticism articles) | Top | |
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance Skepticism articles) | High | |
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Skepticism articles) | Mid | |
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance Skepticism articles) | Low | |
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance Skepticism articles) | NA | |
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Skepticism articles) | ??? |
Importance scale
Requesting an assessment
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.
Conspiracy TheoryStill C class. There's a quote repeated a few times, and the Examples section should have at least some of the more famous. Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Rod (cryptozoology)It's a B class. Not sure it's any higher, but still, nice article. Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Gerovital (possibly also categorizable under alternative medicine?)It's written well enough, but needs too many citations, C class. Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science - still under development and discussion, but an assessment would be helpfulThat was a read, but B class it is. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Creation and evolution in public education UnratedIt's been rated a B since. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Amazing Meeting has recently been significantly rewrittenIt's at a B level now, and I'd say even higher. @Sgerbic: you may wish to use peer-review to ask for a higher level. Jerod Lycett (talk) 07:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)NarcononAssessed for us. Jerod Lycett (talk) 08:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Diploma millIt's assessed correctly as B class. Jerod Lycett (talk) 08:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Anneliese Michel - recently brought within this projects fold, has some improvement but not assessed so far.Assessed it as B, not sure it's higher though. Jerod Lycett (talk) 08:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)Jere H. LippsChecked: After the update I have assessed as B. The article suffers from a lack of photos. Lipps has some important research that could be expanded in a future update. Kyle(talk) 02:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC) 02:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)- Tyler Henry reality show "medium" in USA Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 08:45, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
- Rommel myth -- new article. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:39, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
- James Oberg -- expanded, please assess. Akumiszcza (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
- List of superstitions - Converted from redirect to stub, assessed as Mid importance taking a clue from Superstition, which has a Top rating. Paradoctor (talk) 14:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
- Fad diet - entire revision using WP:MEDRS sources for health claims (guidelines, reviews), and reviews and encyclopedias for the history section + cleaning/deleting primary sources + illustrations. Was rated a start class a long time ago, should be reassessed. --Signimu (talk) 19:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Roberto Burioni Expanded from a stub. Please assess. JohnnyBflat (talk) 15:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Assessment log
Skepticism 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.
June 1, 2024
Renamed
- Comstock laws renamed to Comstock Act of 1873.
Reassessed
- Transpersonal psychology (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Mid-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Category:2020s supernatural films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Comstock Act of 1873 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
May 31, 2024
Assessed
- The Lightning Process (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
- Zegrze Reservoir Monster (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)
May 30, 2024
Assessed
- Category:1890s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1910s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1920s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1930s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1940s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1950s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1960s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1970s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1980s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:1990s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:2000s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:2010s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:2020s supernatural horror films (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Category:Wikipedia categories named after occultists (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
May 29, 2024
Reassessed
- Oracle (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
- Scientology controversies (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
May 27, 2024
Reassessed
- Amulet (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to B-Class. (rev · t)
- Traditional Korean medicine (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t)
Assessed
- Golden billion (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t)
May 26, 2024
Reassessed
- Early life of L. Ron Hubbard (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Low-Class to NA-Class. (rev · t)
- Esotericism (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from High-Class to NA-Class. (rev · t)