Welcome to theassessment department of theWikiProject on Motorsport, which focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia'sAuto racing related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in theWP:1.0 programme.
The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the{{WikiProject Motorsport}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories ofCategory:Motorsport articles by quality andCategory:Motorsport articles by importance, which serve as the foundation for anautomatically generated worklist.
An article's assessment is generated from theclass parameter in the{{WikiProject Motorsport}} project banner on its talk page (see thetemplate page for more details on the exact syntax):
The following values for theclass parameter may be used:
The following values for theimportance parameter may be used:
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed inCategory:Unassessed motorsport articles and articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed inCategory:Unknown-importance motorsport articles. The class and importance should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
| Label | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editor's experience | Example | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 FA{{FA-Class}} | Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status afterpeer review, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. | Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. | No further editing is necessary unless new published information has come to light; but further improvements to the text are often possible. | Brabham (as of January 2007) | ||
 A{{A-Class}} | Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described inHow to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from "hard" (peer-reviewed where appropriate) literature rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered forfeatured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. | Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points. | Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work.Peer-review would be helpful at this stage. | Eagle Mk1 (as of May 2007) | ||
 GA{{GA-Class}} | The article has passed through theGood article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting thegood article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise good. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but having completed theGood article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class. | Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, excessive information. Adequate for most purposes, but other encyclopedias could do a better job. | Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. If the article is not already fullywikified, now is the time. | Monaco Grand Prix (as of January 2007) | ||
| B {{B-Class}} | Has several of the elements described in "start", usually amajority of the material needed for a completed article. Nonetheless, it has significant gaps or missing elements or references, needs substantial editing for English language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright,Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) orNo Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet theGood article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles. | Useful to many, but not all, readers. A casual reader flipping through articles would feel that they generally understood the topic, but a serious student or researcher trying to use the material would have trouble doing so, or would risk error in derivative work. | Considerable editing is still needed, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors. Articles for whichcleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. | Nigel Mansell (as of January 2007) has a lot of helpful material but contains too many lists, and needs more prose content & references. | ||
| C {{C-Class}} | The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantialcleanup.
| 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 addresscleanup issues. | Ron Dennis (as of July 2008) | ||
| Start {{Start-Class}} | The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including anyone of the following:
| Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded. | Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an articlecleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage. | Michael Andretti (as of January 2007) | ||
| Stub {{Stub-Class}} | The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. | Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition. | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. | Fred Agabashian (as of January 2007) |
| Label | Criteria | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Top | Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field. | Formula One (as of 2013) |
| High | Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. | Lewis Hamilton (as of 2013) |
| Mid | Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. | Bernd Schneider (as of 2013) |
| 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. | Dominik Farnbacher (as of 2013) |
| Motorsport articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
| FA | 4 | 1 | 6 | 11 | |||
| FL | 1 | 5 | 9 | 15 | |||
| A | 1 | 1 | |||||
| GA | 4 | 7 | 24 | 112 | 4 | 151 | |
| B | 22 | 30 | 59 | 190 | 33 | 334 | |
| C | 25 | 76 | 239 | 1,831 | 1 | 305 | 2,477 |
| Start | 11 | 72 | 554 | 6,702 | 6 | 1,708 | 9,053 |
| Stub | 2 | 178 | 2,916 | 7 | 2,170 | 5,273 | |
| List | 1 | 3 | 14 | 325 | 1 | 202 | 546 |
| NA | 11 | 63 | 8,741 | 8,815 | |||
| Assessed | 63 | 195 | 1,085 | 12,155 | 8,756 | 4,422 | 26,676 |
| Unassessed | 2 | 417 | 419 | ||||
| Total | 63 | 195 | 1,085 | 12,157 | 8,756 | 4,839 | 27,095 |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω =87,860 | Ω = 5.09 | |||||
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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please useWikipedia:Peer review instead.
The full log of assessment changes for the past seven days.