Discussion

Alerts

Assessment

Showcase

Resources

Article assessment involves determining the quality and importance of articles of interest to WikiProject Conservatism. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.The article review processes provide constructive criticism which is used by editors to improve articles. We're happy to assess your new article as well as developed articles.

Conservatism articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	3	11	15	19			48
FL				1			1
FM					44		44
A	1			1			2
GA	6	8	25	81		2	122
B	28	96	240	597		100	1,061
C	39	150	382	1,378	1	261	2,211
Start	14	87	446	2,379		661	3,587
Stub		10	78	809		295	1,192
List	2	7	27	108		6	150
Category					1,126		1,126
Disambig					23		23
File					191		191
Portal					137		137
Project					43		43
Redirect	3	5	12	87	342		449
Template					230		230
NA					3		3
Other				2	22		24
Assessed	96	374	1,225	5,462	2,162	1,325	10,644
Unassessed			1	9		23	33
Total	96	374	1,226	5,471	2,162	1,348	10,677
WikiWork factors (?)		ω =37,361			Ω = 4.54

Index ·Statistics ·Log

To request an assessment of your new or developed article click here:

If you would like an outside opinion on a new quality and/or importance rating for your article, please feel free click the button. This will result in an assessment rating of Stub, Start, C or B.

Request assessment

The assessment system used by the WikiProject Conservatism to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assesslists and similar non-prose articles.

Prose article				List article
		Stub				The first stage of an article's evolution is called astub. A stub is an extremely short article that provides a basic description of the topic at best; it includes very little meaningful content, and may be little more than a dictionary definition. At this stage, it is often impossible to determine whether the topic should be covered by a prose article or a list, so this assessment level is shared between the two scales.
Start				List		A stub that undergoes some development will progress to the next stage of article evolution. An article at this stage provides some meaningful content, but is typically incomplete and lacks adequate references, structure, and supporting materials. At this stage, it becomes possible to distinguish between prose articles and lists; depending on its form, an article at this level will be assessed as aStart-Class prose article or aList-Class list. Detailed criteria The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element; it has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following: A particularly useful picture or graphic Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
C						As the article continues to develop, it will reach theC-Class level. At this stage, the article is reasonably structured and contains substantial content and supporting materials, but may still be incomplete or poorly referenced, but not both. As articles progress to this stage, the assessment process begins to take on a more structured form, and specific criteria are introduced against which articles are rated. The article meets at least one of the B-Class criteria. Detailed criteria B1. It issuitably referenced, and all major points haveappropriate inline citations. B2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. B3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. B4. It is free from major grammatical errors. B5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such asan infobox, images, or diagrams.
B						An article that reaches theB-Class level is complete in content and structure, adequately referenced, and includes reasonable supporting materials; overall, it provides a satisfactory encyclopedic presentation of the topic for the average reader, although it might not be written to the standard that would be expected by an expert. Articles at this stage commonly undergopeer review to solicit ideas for further improvement. B-Class is the final assessment level that can be reached without undergoing a formal review process, and is a reasonable goal for newer editors. Detailed criteria B1. It issuitably referenced, and all major points haveappropriate inline citations. B2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. B3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. B4. It is free from major grammatical errors. B5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such asan infobox, images, or diagrams.
GA						After reaching the B-Class level, an article may be submitted for assessment as agood article. Good articles must meet a set ofcriteria similar to those required for the B-Class assessment level, and must additionally undergo theformal good article review process. Detailed criteria Agood article is: Well-written: the prose is clear, concise, andunderstandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with theManual of Style guidelines forlead sections,layout,words to watch,fiction, andlist incorporation. Verifiable withno original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance withthe layout style guideline; reliable sources arecited inline. All content thatcould reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); it containsno original research; and it contains nocopyright violations orplagiarism. Broad in its coverage: it addresses themain aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (seesummary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoingedit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, bymedia such asimages,video, oraudio: media aretagged with theircopyright statuses, andvalid non-free use rationales are provided fornon-free content; and media arerelevant to the topic, and havesuitable captions.
A				AL		A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for theA-Class assessment level. An A-Class article presents a complete and thorough encyclopedic treatment of a subject, such as might be written by an expert in the field; the only deficiencies permissible at this level are minor issues of style or language. To receive an A-Class rating, a candidate article must undergo the formal A-Class review process. The A-Class rating is the highest assessment level that may be assigned by an individual WikiProject; higher assessment levels are granted only by Wikipedia-wide independent assessment processes. Detailed criteria A1. The article/list is consistently referenced withan appropriate citation style, and all claims areverifiable againstreputable sources, accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge, and are supported with specific evidence and external citationsas appropriate. A2. The article/list is comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and focused on the main topic; it neglects no major facts or details, presents viewsfairly and without bias, and does not go into unnecessary detail. A3. The article/list has an appropriate structure of hierarchical headings, including a conciselead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections, and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents. A4. The article/list is written in concise and articulate English; its prose is clear, is in line withstyle guidelines, and does not require substantial copy-editing to be fully MoS-compliant. A5. The article/list containsappropriately licensed supporting visual materials, such as images or diagrams with succinct captions, and other media, where relevant.
FA				FL		Thefeatured article andfeatured list ratings represent the pinnacle of article evolution and the best that Wikipedia has to offer; an article at this level is professional, outstanding, and represents a definitive source for encyclopedic information. Featured status is assigned only through a thoroughindependent review process; this process can be grueling for the unprepared, and editors are highly advised to submit articles forA-Class review prior to nominating them for featured status. Detailed criteria Afeatured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting thepolicies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes. It is: well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard; comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims areverifiable against high-qualityreliable sources and are supported by inline citationswhere appropriate; neutral: it presents viewsfairly and without bias; stable: it is not subject to ongoingedit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and compliant withWikipedia's copyright policy and free ofplagiarism ortoo-close paraphrasing. It follows thestyle guidelines, including the provision of: a lead: a conciselead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchicalsection headings; and consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—seeciting sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required. Media. It hasimages and other media, where appropriate, with succinctcaptions andacceptable copyright status. Images follow theimage use policy.Non-free images or media must satisfy thecriteria for inclusion of non-free content andbe labeled accordingly. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and usessummary style where appropriate.

Importance scale

• Assess the article using the quality and importance schemes above.
• Once assessed add{{WikiProject Conservatism|class=|importance=}} to the Talk page with the correctparameters.
• Edit the Talk page to add a comment about why you rated the article the way you did. Please sign and date your comment with ~~~~.
• TheRater tool can assist with article assessment. Another tool is theKingbotk plugin for AutoWikiBrowser.

See below for assessing specific quality types

Stub

Stubs are assessed using Individual Review, and the author is free to assess the article. If the article is assessed better than a stub but it has a stub template, remove the stub template(s) from the article. Currently there are no conservatism stub templates, identification of stubs is accomplished by settingclass=stub in the banner. This categorizes article talk pages intoCategory:Stub-Class Conservatism articles. Politics stub templates can also be useful. The stub for a politician is{{Poli-bio-stub}} and a political organization is{{poli-org-stub}}. SeeWP:WikiProject Conservatism/Templates for more stubs.

C-Class

C-Class articles are assessed using Individual Review, and the author is free to assess the article.

B-Class

B-Class articles are assessed using Individual Review, rating is typically left to an independent editor; requests for an independent assessment may be madehere.

GA-Class

Thegood article nomination process is an independent review mechanism through which an article receives a "good article" quality rating. The process involves a detailed review of the article by an independent examiner, who determines whether the article meets thegood article criteria. Full instructions for requesting a good article review are provided on the good article review page.

A-Class

The WikiProject Conservatism A-Class review process is the most thorough and demanding assessment of article quality done by the WikiProject Conservatism. An article that undergoes this process must be reviewed by at least two independent examiners, each of whom must agree that the article meets all of theA-Class criteria. Full instructions for requesting an A-Class review are provided on theA-Class review page.

FA-Class

Thefeatured article candidacy andfeatured list candidacy processes are an independent, Wikipedia-wide quality assessment mechanism; these processes are the only way an article can receive a "featured" quality rating. The process involves a comprehensive review of the article by multiple independent examiners, all of whom must agree that the article meets thefeatured article or list criteria. Full instructions for submitting a featured article or list candidacy are provided on the corresponding candidacy page. Editors are advised to carefully review the submission instructions; failing to follow them correctly may cause the submission to be rejected.

Q: An article was erroneously tagged by amember of this project.

A: Do not remove the banner. Ask the member why they tagged it, or post a message at the project talk page (below). Note: the banner does not imply that the subject has aconservative orright-wing ideology, has no relevance toneutral POV, nor that WikiProject Conservatismowns the article.^[1]

Q: I'm a member and the banner I added to an article talk page was removed.

A: FromPROGGUIDE:You may not force them to remove the banner. No editor may prohibit a group of editors from showing their interest in an article. This warning{{WPRYT Uw-banner}} can be used to notify an editor of the guideline.

Q: Can non-members tag articles?

A: Yes, but if a member removes the banner do not replace it.^[1]

Q: The quality or importance rating of an article is incorrect.

A: Anyone can change the rating. Make sure to consult the assessment scalehere. Ratings are subjective, importance ratings in particular can be controversial. Disputes will be resolved by project members at the project talk page (below).^[2][3]

Q: What is the scope of this WikiProject?

A: As stated on themain page of this project, we are dedicated to improving articles related toconservatism, not limited to any particular form or national variety of conservatism.

Former Featued articles and lists are good candidates for A-Class review.

This is a list of recognized content, updated weekly byJL-Bot (talk ·contribs) (typically on Saturdays). There is no need to edit the list yourself. If an article is missing from the list, make sure it istagged (e.g.{{WikiProject Conservatism}}) orcategorized correctly and wait for the next update. SeeWP:RECOG for configuration options.

Former featured articles

Anarcho-capitalism •Paul Bremer •Bricker Amendment •Tom Brinkman •Constitution of the United States •Gerald Ford •Frankfurt School •Bruce Johnson (Ohio politician) •Liberal Movement (Australia) •Libertarianism •John Major •Bob McEwen •Original sin •Political correctness •Read my lips: no new taxes •Nancy Reagan •Theodore Roosevelt •Nicolas Sarkozy •Jean Schmidt •Separation of powers under the United States Constitution •Edward Teller •Margaret Thatcher •Daniel Webster •Zionism

Former featured lists

List of chief ministers from the Bharatiya Janata Party

Former featured pictures

• Commercial-LBJ1964ElectionAdDaisyGirl

Former good articles

Max Boot •Edmund Burke •George H. W. Bush •George W. Bush •Laura Bush •James Cagney •David Cameron •Capitalism •Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh •Dick Cheney •Mike Cierpiot •Cold War •College Republicans •Mitch Daniels •Death panel •Falun Gong •Foundation for Economic Education •Newt Gingrich •Ayaan Hirsi Ali •Alan Keyes •Liaquat Ali Khan •Marcel Lefebvre •Rush Limbaugh •McCarthyism •Michigan Republican Party •Elon Musk •National Rally •New World Order conspiracy theory •Patrick Henry College •Ron Paul •Rape and pregnancy statement controversies in the 2012 United States elections •Condoleezza Rice •Ellen Roberts •Larry Sanger •Michael Savage •Second impeachment trial of Donald Trump •UMNO •Unitary executive theory •The Wall Street Journal •Geert Wilders •Wildrose Party •Michael Yon

• WikiProject Conservatism
• Wikipedia lists of recognized content
• WikiProject assessments