 | This is aWikiProject, an open group of Wikipedia editors. New participants are welcome; feel free totalk to us! |
| Shortcut | WP:EWA |
|---|---|
| Parent project(s) | Washington |
| Project banner template | {{WikiProject United States|WA=yes|WA-importance=|EastWa=yes|EastWa-importance=}} |
| Userbox | {{EasternWABox}} |
SomeWikipedians have formed aproject to better organize information in articles related toEastern Washington. This page and its subpages contain their suggestions; it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians. This project was officially started on 9 August 2006.
Did you know
RSS Atom) ·FindArticle Alerts for other topics!WikiProject Eastern Washington's goal is to add content, photos and information for all Eastern Washington pages. Right now it is focused oncities,towns,counties andplaces but as the project grows we hope to expand and cover all things related to Eastern Washington!
Anyone from, or with knowledge of Eastern Washington is welcome!
| Eastern Washington task force articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | ??? | Total | |
 FA | 1 | 3 | 4 | ||||
| FM | 1 | 1 | |||||
 A | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||||
 GA | 1 | 1 | 9 | 52 | 63 | ||
| B | 2 | 3 | 13 | 55 | 73 | ||
| C | 2 | 5 | 4 | 22 | 76 | 109 | |
| Start | 2 | 6 | 11 | 70 | 158 | 247 | |
| Stub | 5 | 34 | 42 | 166 | 247 | ||
| List | 1 | 6 | 9 | 16 | |||
| Category | 74 | 74 | |||||
| Disambig | 2 | 2 | |||||
| File | 2 | 2 | |||||
| Project | 6 | 6 | |||||
| Redirect | 2 | 3 | 21 | 26 | |||
| Template | 26 | 26 | |||||
| Assessed | 6 | 19 | 56 | 165 | 132 | 520 | 898 |
| Total | 6 | 19 | 56 | 165 | 132 | 520 | 898 |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω =3,493 | Ω = 4.71 | |||||
This is a short list of the articles that this WikiProject should focus on currently. The full list of articles can be foundhere.
These articles are less important to this project at this point, but of course any contribution is welcomed.
| What to type | What it produces | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
{{WikiProject United States|WA=Yes|WA-importance=|EastWa=Yes|EastWa-importance=}} |
| ||||||||||||||||
| {{EasternWABox}} links talk edit |
| ||||||||||||||||
Similar to theCollaboration of the week, but on a smaller scale, you might want to "adopt" an article. This would involve doing the research, writing, and picture-taking (if possible) for either a non-existent article or a stub. Of course, everyone else can still edit an adopted article, and you can work on other things too, but the idea is to find a focus for a while, to try and build up the number of quality articles the Project has produced.
| Label | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editor's experience | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 necessary, unless new published information has come to light. | Australia (as of July 6 2006) |
| 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 the "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. | Spokane |
| 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 being aGood article 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. | Eric Bana,Uluru |
| 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, NPOV or 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. | Boomerang. |
| Start {{Start-Class}} | The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a table. 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:
| Not useless. Some readers will find what they are looking for, but most will not. Most articles in this category have the look of an article "under construction" and a reader genuinely interested in the topic is likely to seek additional information elsewhere. | Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article usually isn't even good enough for acleanup tag: it still needs to be built. | Jimmy Barnes |
| 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. | May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition. | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. | Coffee table book (as of July 2005) |
Unless noted otherwise, the following articles have no pictures. Anyone's pictures would be appreciated.
Wikipedia:WikiProject Templates
 General | |
|---|---|
| Directories and reports | |
 Culture and the arts | |
 Geographical | |
 History and society | |
 Science, technologyand engineering | |
 Wikipedia assistanceand tasks | |
