Novel articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	7	17	45	28		1	98
FL	1	6	17	23			47
GA	11	40	122	220		16	409
B	48	131	372	374		56	981
C	72	333	1,274	2,435		283	4,397
Start	22	495	4,448	10,532	2	1,431	16,930
Stub	2	125	3,123	12,653		3,146	19,049
List	2	11	599	556		81	1,249
Category					14,840		14,840
Disambig					96		96
File					21,284		21,284
Portal					44		44
Project					222		222
Redirect		8	326	2,492	5,584		8,410
Template					2,317		2,317
NA					2		2
Other			2	3	116		121
Assessed	165	1,166	10,328	29,316	44,507	5,014	90,496
Unassessed		2	4	26		2,294	2,326
Total	165	1,168	10,332	29,342	44,507	7,308	92,822
WikiWork factors (?)		ω =220,282			Ω = 5.26

Hello and welcome to theassessment department of the Novels WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's novel and novel-related articles. Much of the work is done in conjunction with theWP: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 Novels}} talk page project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories ofCategory:Novel articles by quality andCategory:Novel articles by importance, which serve as the sources for anautomatically generated worklist.

How do I add an article to the WikiProject?

Just add{{WikiProject Novels}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

Someone put a{{WikiProject Novels}} template on an article, but it's not a novel or related article. What should I do?

If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on thetalk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).

How can I get my article rated?

Please list it in thesection for assessment requests below.

Who can assess articles?

Any member of the Novels 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 thesection 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 (see, in particular, the disclaimers on theimportance scale), but it's the best systemWP:1.0 have been able to devise; if you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!

How can I keep track of changes in article ratings?

A full log of changes over the past thirty days is availablehere. If you are just looking for an overview, however, themonthly statistics may be more accessible.

What if I have a question not listed here?

If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can ask them on themain project general forum page, or contact one of the othermembers directly.

An article's assessment is generated from theclass andimportance parameters in the{{WikiProject Novels}} project banner on its talk page (see theproject banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{WikiProject Novels| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used for theclass parameter:

• FA (adds articles toCategory:FA-Class novel articles)
• FL (adds articles toCategory:FL-Class novel articles) - Featured List (subject to the same controls as FA)
• A (adds articles toCategory:A-Class novel articles)
• GA (adds articles toCategory:GA-Class novel articles)
• B (adds articles toCategory:B-Class novel articles)
• C (adds articles toCategory:C-Class novel articles)
• Start (adds articles toCategory:Start-Class novel articles)
• Stub (adds articles toCategory:Stub-Class novel articles)
• NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages toCategory:NA-Class novel articles)
• Cat (adds pages toCategory:Category-Class novel pages)
• Dab (adds pages toCategory:Disambig-Class novel pages)
• List (adds articles toCategory:List-Class novel articles)
• Portal (adds pages toCategory:Portal-Class novel pages)
• Project (adds pages toCategory:Project-Class novel pages)
• Redirect (adds pages toCategory:Redirect-Class novel pages)
• Template (adds pages toCategory:Template-Class novel pages)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed inCategory:Unassessed novel articles. The class should be assigned according to thequality scale below.

The following values may be used for theimportance parameter:

• Top (adds articles toCategory:Top-importance novel articles)
• High (adds articles toCategory:High-importance novel articles)
• Mid (adds articles toCategory:Mid-importance novel articles)
• Low (adds articles toCategory:Low-importance novel articles)

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set toNA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to theimportance scale below.

Class	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA	The article has attainedfeatured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers fromWP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria The article meets thefeatured article 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.	Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.	Cleopatra (as of June 2018)
FL	The article has attainedfeatured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers fromWP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria The article meets thefeatured list criteria: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaginglead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) statements aresourced where they appear, and they provideinline citations if they contain any of thefour kinds of material absolutely required to have citations. (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements forstand-alone lists and includes at minimum eight items; does not violate thecontent-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful,section headings andtable sort facilities. Style. It complies with theManual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a)Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting,tables, andcolour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked. (b)Media files. It hasimages and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia'susage policies, with succinctcaptions.Non-free images and other media satisfy thecriteria for the inclusion of non-free content andare labeled accordingly. (c)Accessibility. Ituses proper formatting to beaccessible to all readers.Bulleted and unbulleted lists andtables are structured correctly. Visual media, if included, utilizealternative (alt) text. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoingedit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.	Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items.	No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.	List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018)
A	The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria The article meets theA-Class criteria: Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described inWikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as afeatured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g.WikiProject Military history).	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting.	Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving.WP:Peer review may help.	Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014)
GA	The article meetsall of thegood article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers fromWP:Good article nominations. More 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.	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication.	Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existingfeatured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.	Everybody Wants to Rule the World (as of October 2025)
B	The article meetsall of theB-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reachgood article standards. More detailed criteria The article issuitably referenced, withinline citations. It hasreliable sources, and any important or controversial material which islikely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of<ref> tags andcitation templates such as{{cite web}} is optional. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for anA-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including alead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to beof the standard of featured articles. TheManual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, aninfobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in anappropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background andtechnical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.	Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.	A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with theManual of Style and relatedstyle guidelines.	Psychology (as of January 2024)
C	The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantialcleanup. More detailed criteria The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.	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 solvecleanup problems.	Wing (as of June 2018)
Start	An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following: A 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	Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more.	Providing references toreliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon.	Gravel (as of January 2006)
Stub	A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria.	Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant.	Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014)
List	Meets the criteria of astand-alone list orset index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area.	There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader.	Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized.	List of literary movements

The criteria used for rating article importance are meant to be a probable indication of how significant the topic is to a reader of literature, and how likely it would be covered in a serious encyclopedia. Hence, for example,Moby-Dick would be ranked higher than an averageAnne Rice orSidney Sheldon novel.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.

N.B. Discussion on which articles should be included in the "Top" priority class takes place here,Top priority.

See theassessment request archive.

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free tolist it below at the bottom of the list. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use thepeer review department instead.

To assess an article, simply update the Novels WikiProject template on the article's talk page. Please also strike out the request on this page by using the <s>Strike-through text</s> command and add a rationale for your assessment. Don't forget to sign your username after your comment.

1. Tarzan of the Apes: Looks like it was last assessed in 2006, and the article has changed significantly since then. There's enough research out there to make it a GA eventually (though I know it would prob take a lot of work). Just interested in an accurate assessment before diving in.--MattMauler (talk)18:49, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Reassessed asC-class: It's a reasonable article but needs to addressWP:LEAD, the list-sections perlist incorporation (they may be better merged with other sections), and it could use a Reception section (the lead mentions how popular it was but that is not stated in the body).maclean (talk)03:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2. Legendary Moonlight Sculptor: It's been start-class for a while now. I've worked on it, and hopefully qualifies as more than that. Let me know. -MakersBreath (talk)13:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Reassessed asC-classby User:DanielleTH.

3. David Copperfield: I andPrairieplant have recently made major improvements to this article, and wonder if it's now a B category, or if further improvements are needed?Rwood128 (talk)17:56, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Reassessed asB-class[1] It reasonably covers the topic, is suitably referenced and reasonably well-written. For a more in-depth review, it can be nominated for GA-status.maclean (talk)18:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

4. Jennifer Government: Recently rewrote the article, pruning out non-encyclopedic material and improving source cites. I'm hoping that I improved it enough to bring it up toB-class. Thanks in advance for your time.Krinn DNZ (talk)17:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Krinndz: That article is still barely a start -- in particular, on literary articles, most of our focus is on reception, themes and other kinds of critical information about how the world engages the book. However, the current version of the articles is alsmostAll Plot describing the plot, and its setting. For more recommendations or guidance, see the style guide:Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Novels,Sadads (talk)19:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. Enna Burning I recently edited & expanded this article; it shouldn't be stub classCstickel(byu) (talk)17:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2. Gideon the Ninth I fixed many factual errors in the plot section, added more references and created a Style section.Dharmaprasanth (talk)00:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
3. The Last Chronicle of Barset I have worked on this page as a university assignment and would like a rating on it. Thank you!User: Cutedogs12311:56, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Done Reasonably meetsB-class criteria[2]maclean (talk)03:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

4. Vignettes (literature) I've edited and expanded this article for an assignment at my university. I would be very grateful for someone to assess this article. Thanks! --Penceypug (talk)02:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    Done MeetsC-class criteria[3]maclean (talk)03:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

5. Chronicles of Barsetshire I recently completed a major edit to this page, the topic of which I am very passionate about. I'm really proud of how it turned out, so would love if it could be reassessed. Thanks!BjL1504 (talk)00:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
6. The Tolkien Reader This article is rated start-class, but I have added a significant amount of information to it in the last month, so could someone please reassess it? Like others here, I did this for a university assignment, and would really appreciate a reassessment. Thanks! --Hofendorf (talk)14:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
7. Sweet Caress This article about a novel by William Boyd was first edited three years ago, but hasn't been assessed yet. I'd appreciate a rating, please: thank you.Headhitter (talk)08:59, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
8. The Zombie Survival Guide I completed an overhaul of this article to bring it up to Wikipedia standards a year ago, and have continued to add information as I've found sources for it. Would appreciate a reassessment, as I think it's no longer start-class.WilliamTravis (talk)18:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
9. Gothic double This article isn't about a specific novel but about a motif in literature, however I did expand it from a stub by adding sections about many different Gothic novels and short stories. Please let me know if this article is suitable for this WikiProject, and if so I would appreciate an assessment please. Thank you!Snowdrop Fairy (talk)02:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
10. Bug Jack Barron I've cut down the plot summary to less than 700 words and rearranged a few ideas for better flow. I feel it's worthy of being raised to start class at this point.Just Another Cringy Username (talk)05:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
11. The Unbalancing Requesting initial assessment on this article for the novelThe Unbalancing by R. B. Lemberg. This novel is of interest to the Fantasy task force. Thanks.CorundumCat (talk)13:08, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The Small-tooth Dog I have recently heavily overhauled the article and would love an outside opinion and a rating if anyone is willing. No rush. Thank you! 11/25/2023WalkingAsGiants (talk)18:40, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Les Mains d'Orlac I have recently overhauled the article which was previously a stub. The novel/article may be of interest to the sf and fantasy task force.Andrzejbanas (talk)14:13, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All figures given for theend of each month

	Jun 2006		Jul 2006		Aug 2006		Sep 2006		Oct 2006		Nov 2006		Dec 2006		Jan 2007		Feb 2007		Mar 2007		Apr 2007		Feb 2009
FA	8	0.37 %	8	0.29 %	7	0.20 %	6	0.14 %	6	0.11 %	7	0.12 %	7	0.10 %	9	0.11 %	10	0.11 %	10	0.10 %	10	0.09 %	21	0.0009 %
A	0	0.00 %	0	0.00 %	2	0.06 %	4	0.10 %	4	0.07 %	4	0.07 %	6	0.10 %	5	0.06 %	4	0.04 %	4	0.04 %	4	0.03 %	1	~0 %
GA	0	0.00 %	3	0.11 %	8	0.23 %	7	0.17 %	8	0.15 %	8	0.14 %	8	0.11 %	7	0.08 %	10	0.11 %	10	0.10 %	10	0.09 %	60	.0028 %
B	7	0.32 %	82	2.96 %	170	4.81 %	313	7.50 %	398	7.44 %	472	8.19 %	559	7.67 %	718	8.59 %	768	8.54 %	779	7.57 %	810	7.00 %	946	.0437 %
C	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	246	.0114 %
Start	32	1.46 %	256	9.24 %	416	11.78 %	712	9.97 %	1011	18.91 %	1190	20.66 %	1499	20.57 %	2167	25.92 %	2474	27.50 %	2558	24.86 %	2868	24.79 %	4679	21.61 %
Stub	24	1.10 %	353	12.74 %	540	15.29 %	1022	24.50 %	1771	33.12 %	2238	38.85 %	3455	47.41 %	4799	57.41 %	5724	63.64 %	6920	67.24 %	7453	64.42 %	15589	71.99 %
Unassessed	2114	96:75 %	2069	74:76 %	2388	67.63 %	2108	50.53 %	2049	38.32 %	1842	31.97 %	1753	24.06 %	654	7.82 %	5	0.05 %	9	0.09 %	415	3.59 %	0	0 %
Top	0		19	0.69 %	51	1.44 %	69	2.40 %	73	1.37 %	73	1.27 %	76	1.04 %	81	0.97 %	89	0.99 %	87	0.85 %	90	0.78 %	109	.0050 %
High	0		105	3.79 %	170	4.81 %	417	10.00 %	551	10.30 %	601	10.43 %	652	8.95 %	712	8.52 %	747	8.30 %	756	7.35 %	777	6.72 %	839	.0387 %
Mid	0		359	12.96 %	598	16.94 %	1077	25.81 %	1517	28.37 %	2060	35.76 %	3070	42.13 %	4634	55.44 %	5349	59.47 %	5609	54.51 %	6149	53.15 %	8092	37.37 %
Low	0		172	6.21 %	271	7.67 %	440	10.55 %	1000	18.70 %	1181	20.50 %	1734	23.80 %	2272	27.18 %	2802	31.15 %	3413	33.17 %	4132	35.71 %	11224	51.83 %
Total	2185		2771		3531		4172		5347		5761		7287		8359		8995		10290		11570		21654

Percent change is given relative to the prior count in each class.

	Jul 2006		Aug 2006		Sep 2006		Oct 2006		Nov 2006		Dec 2006		Jan 2007		Feb 2007		Mar 2007		Apr 2007		May 2007 (tba)
FA	+0	0.00 %	-1	-12.50 %	-1	-14.29 %	0	0.00 %	+1	16.67 %	0	0.00 %	+2	28.57 %	+1	11.11 %	0	0.00 %	0	00.00 %
A	+0		+2		+2	100.00 %	0	0.00 %	0	0.00 %	+2	50.00 %	-1	-16.67 %	-1	-20.00 %	0	0.00 %	0	00.00 %
GA	+ 3		+5	166.67 %	-1	-12.50 %	+1	14.29 %	0	0.00 %	0	0.00 %	-1	-12.50 %	+3	42.86 %	0	0.00 %	0	00.00 %
B	+75	1071.43 %	+88	107.32 %	+143	84.12 %	+85	27.16 %	+74	18.59 %	+78	16.53 %	+159	28.44 %	+50	6.96 %	+11	1.43 %	+31	3.98 %
Start	+224	700.00 %	+160	62.50 %	+296	71.15 %	+299	41.99 %	+179	17.71 %	+309	25.97 %	+668	44.56 %	+307	14.17 %	+84	3.40 %	+310	12.19 %
Stub	+329	1370.83 %	+187	52.97 %	+482	89.26 %	+749	73.29 %	+467	26.37 %	+1217	54.38 %	+1344	38.90 %	+925	19.27 %	+1196	20.89 %	+533	07.70 %
Unassessed	-45	-2.13 %	+319	15.42 %	-280	-11.73 %	-59	-2.80 %	-207	-10.10 %	-89	-4.83 %	-1099	-62.69 %	-649	-99.24 %	+4	80.00 %	+406	4511.11 %
Top	+19		+32	168.42 %	+18	35.29 %	+4	5.80 %	0	0.00 %	+3	4.11 %	+5	6.58 %	+8	9.88 %	-2	-2.25 %	+3	3.45 %
High	+105		+65	61.90 %	+247	145.29 %	+134	32.13 %	+50	9.07 %	+51	4.89 %	+60	9.20 %	+35	4.92 %	+9	1.20 %	+21	2.81 %
Mid	+359		+239	66.57 %	+479	80.10 %	+440	40.85 %	+543	35.79 %	+1010	49.03 %	+1564	50.94 %	+715	15.43 %	+260	4.86 %	+540	9.63 %
Low	+172		+99	57.56 %	+169	62.36 %	+560	127.27 %	+181	18.10 %	+553	46.82 %	+538	31.03 %	+530	23.33 %	+611	5.84 %	+719	21.07 %
Total	+586	+26.82 %	+760	+27.43 %	+641	+18.15 %	+1175	+28.16 %	+404	+3.57 %	+1526	+26.49 %	+1072	+14.71 %	+636	+07.61 %	+1295	+14.40 %	+1280	+12.44 %

Thefull log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; due to its size (ca 100 kB), it cannot be transcluded directly.

• WikiProject Novels
• WikiProject assessments