Wikipedia:WikiProject Contract bridge/Assessment

{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Contract bridge articles by quality statistics}}

{{main|Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment}}

{{main|Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Assessment FAQ}}

This forum provides additional guidelines for assessing the quality and importance of Wikipedia's contract bridge related articles.

{{TOC limit|limit=2}}

While the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project to aid in recognizing excellence and identifying topics in need of further work. Ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{tl|WPCB}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of:

and summarized automatically in the table at right. Clicking on a number in the table provides a listing of the articles included in that count; empty categories are simply omitted from the table.

;Update table

The table's data is automatically regenerated every three days and so there will be a lag between more recent article updates and the table's counts.

[http://tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/cgi-bin/update.fcgi Run the update bot now.]

{{WPCBIndex}}

Quality assessments

=Quality classifications=

An article's quality assessment is generated by adding the class parameter and its value to the {{tl|WPCB}} banner on the article's talk page, i.e. {{WPCB|class=value}}. To specify an assessed class, the values in the first column of the following table are substituted for value to assign that quality rating to the article. For example, {{WPCB|class=B}} places the article in :Category:B-Class Contract bridge articles.

If no class parameter value is added (either as {{WPCB}} or {{WPCB|class=}}), class=??? is assigned by default and places the article in the :Category:Unassessed Contract bridge articles.

Class parameters for Category, Project and Template articles are assigned by default by the {{tl|WPCB}} banner on the basis of the prefix to the article name, and so their parameter values need not be (but can be) explicitly added to the {{tl|WPCB}} banner.

class="wikitable"

!Class
Value

Class
Title
Article is added to...Class
Symbol
colspan='4'|Main articles:
align="center"|FAalign="left"|Featured articles:Category:FA-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|FA}}
align="center"|Aalign="left"|Class A Articles:Category:A-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|A}}
align="center"|GAalign="left"|Good articles:Category:GA-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|GA}}
align="center"|Balign="left"|Class B articles:Category:B-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|B}}
align="center"|Calign="left"|Class C articles:Category:C-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|C}}
align="center"|Startalign="left"|Start-class articles:Category:Start-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|Start}}
align="center"|Stubalign="left"|Stub-class articles:Category:Stub-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|Stub}}
colspan='4'|List class articles:
align="center"|FLalign="left"|Featured list-class articles:Category:FL-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|FL}}
align="center"|Listalign="left"|List-class articles:Category:List-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|List}}
colspan='4'|Administrative articles:
align="center"|Categoryalign="left"|Category-class articles:Category:Category-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|Category}}
align="center"|Projectalign="left"|Project-class articles:Category:Project-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|Project}}
align="center"|Templatealign="left"|Template-class articles:Category:Template-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|Template}}
align="center"|Redirectalign="left"|Redirect-class articles:Category:Redirect-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|Redirect}}
align="center"|NAalign="left"|Not Applicable-class articles:Category:NA-Class Contract bridge articles{{class|NA}}
align="center"|???align="left"|Unassessed-class articles:Category:Unassessed Contract bridge articles{{class|Unassessed}}

= Quality grading scheme =

The following table is generic and should be customized to suit contract bridge articles.

For a discussion on the grading scheme being developed for notable bridge people, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contract bridge/Notable people criteria

{{Grading scheme/row

|class = FA

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = The article has attained featured article status.

|detail = The article meets the featured article criteria:{{Wikipedia:Featured article criteria}}

|reader = Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information.

|suggestion = No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.

|specified = {{{FA_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{A|yes}}}

|class = A

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = The article is well-organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject, like military history, or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.

|detail = The article meets the A-Class criteria:
{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/A-Class criteria}}

|reader = Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting.

|suggestion = Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer review may help.

|specified = {{{A_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = GA

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = The article has attained good article status.

|detail = The article meets the good article criteria:{{Wikipedia:Good article criteria}}

|reader = Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia.

|suggestion = Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing.

|specified = {{{GA_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = B

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.

|detail = The article meets the six B-Class criteria:{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria|raw=yes}}

|reader = Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher.

|suggestion = A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines.

|specified = {{{B_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = C

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup.

|detail = The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance or flow; or contain policy violations such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective.

|reader = Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study.

|suggestion = Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues.

|specified = {{{C_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = Start

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and may require further reliable sources.

|detail = The article has a usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide sources to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.

|reader = Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more.

|suggestion = Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation.

|specified = {{{Start_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = Stub

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = A very basic description of the topic.

|detail = The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short, but if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category.

|reader = Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition.

|suggestion = Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority.

|specified = {{{Stub_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = FL

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = The article has attained featured list status.

|detail = The article meets the featured list criteria:{{Wikipedia:Featured list criteria}}

|reader = 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.

|suggestion = No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available.

|specified = {{{FL_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|class = List

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area.

|reader = There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader.

|suggestion = Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized.

|specified = {{{List_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Future_cat|}}}

|class = Future

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = A topic where details are subject to change often.

|detail = The article covers a future topic of which no broadcast version exists so far and all information is subject to change when new information arises from reliable sources. With multiple reliable sources there might be information that contradicts other information in the same or other articles.

|reader = Amount of meaningful content varies over time as the projected event draws near.

|suggestion = Material added might be speculation and should be carefully sourced.

|specified = {{{Future_example|}}}

|default =

|oldid =

|date =

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Cat_cat|}}}

|class = Category

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any category falls under this class.

|reader = Categories are mainly used to group together articles within a particular subject area.

|suggestion = Large categories may need to be split into one or more subcategories. Be wary of articles that have been miscategorized.

|specified = {{{Cat_example|}}}

|default = Category:Software

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Dab_cat|}}}

|class = Disambig

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any disambiguation page falls under this class.

|reader = The page serves to distinguish multiple articles that share the same (or similar) title.

|suggestion = Additions should be made as new articles of that name are created. Pay close attention to the proper naming of such pages, as they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title.

|specified = {{{Dab_example|}}}

|default = Doubling

|oldid = 224521839

|date = October 2008

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{FM_cat|}}}

|class = FM

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Featured pages in the file namespace falls under this class.

|reader = The page contains a featured image, sound clip or other media-related content.

|suggestion = Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited.

|specified = {{{Image_example|{{{FM_example|}}}}}}

|default = File:American World War II senior military officials, 1945.JPEG

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Image_cat|{{{File_cat|}}}}}}

|class = {{#if:{{{Image_cat|}}}|Image|File}}

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any page in the file namespace falls under this class.

|reader = The page contains an image, a sound clip or other media-related content.

|suggestion = Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited.

|specified = {{{Image_example|{{{File_example|}}}}}}

|default = File:Musk Lorikeet jul08.jpg

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Portal_cat|}}}

|class = Portal

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any page in the portal namespace falls under this class.

|reader = Portals are intended to serve as "main pages" for specific topics.

|suggestion = Editor involvement is essential to ensure that portals are kept up to date.

|specified = {{{Portal_example|}}}

|default = Portal:Science

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Project_cat|}}}

|class = Project

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class.

|reader = Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development, and are probably not useful to readers.

|suggestion = Develop these pages into collaborative resources useful for improving articles within the project.

|specified = {{{Project_example|}}}

|default = Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Redirect_cat|}}}

|class = Redirect

|Project = {{{Redirect|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any redirect falls under this class.

|reader = The page redirects to another article with a similar name, related topic or that has been merged the original article at this location.

|suggestion = Editor involvement is essential to ensure that articles are not mis-classified as redirects, and that redirects are not mis-classified as articles.

|specified = {{{Redirect_example|}}}

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{Template_cat|}}}

|class = Template

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any template falls under this class. The most common types of template include infoboxes and navboxes.

|reader = Different types of template serve different purposes. Infoboxes provide easy access to key pieces of information about the subject. Navboxes are for the purpose of grouping together related subjects into an easily accessible format, to assist the user in navigating between articles.

|suggestion = Infoboxes are typically placed at the upper right of an article, while navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page. Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information.

|specified = {{{Template_example|}}}

|default = Template:Martial arts

}}{{Grading scheme/row

|trigger = {{{NA_cat|}}}

|class = NA

|Project = {{{Project|{{{topic|}}}}}}

|criteria = Any non-article page that fits no other classification.

|reader = The page contains no article content, and is probably not useful to any casual reader.

|suggestion = Look out for mis-classified articles. Currently many NA-class articles need to be re-classified.

|specified = {{{NA_example|}}}

}}

Importance assessments

= Importance classifications =

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{tl|WPCB}} project banner on its talk page: {{WPCB| ... | importance=??? | ...}}. The values in the first column of the following table may be substituted for ??? to assign that importance rating to the article. See :Category:Contract bridge articles by importance for a summary of article membership counts in each of the importance classifications.

class="wikitable"

!Importance
Parameter

Importance
Title
Article is added to...Importance
Symbol
align="center"|Topalign="left"|Top importance:Category:Top-importance Contract bridge articles{{importance|Top}}
align="center"|Highalign="left"|High importance:Category:High-importance Contract bridge articles{{importance|High}}
align="center"|Midalign="left"|Middle importance:Category:Mid-importance Contract bridge articles{{importance|Mid}}
align="center"|Lowalign="left"|Low importance:Category:Low-importance Contract bridge articles{{importance|Low}}
align="center"|???align="left"|Unknown importance:Category:Unknown-importance Contract bridge articles{{importance|Unknown}}
align="center"|NAalign="left"|Not Applicable importance:Category:NA-importance Contract bridge articles{{importance|NA}}

{{WPCBIndex}}

= Importance grading scheme =

The following is a customized grading schemes. It requires further refinement and examples articles.

{{Importance scheme}}


class="wikitable"

|+ Draft for Contract Bridge Articles

Importance

! Criteria

! Inclusion Examples

! Exclusion Examples

colspan="4" style="background:#FFCC00;"|In a broad generalization, it is proposed that we corrupt the Pareto principle so that articles of top and high importance constitute the 20% of all bridge articles that would sufficiently enlighten 80% of the readers. Assuming a mature level of say 750 contract bridge articles (there are about 650 as of January 2013), it suggests that no more than about 150 should be in the top two importance categories; say 50 and 100 in top and high respectively. Admitedly these are crude metrics but at least are reference points to be debated. The point is that assessing articles in the top and high categories requires some restraint lest the emphasis they imply becomes meaningless.
{{Top-importance}}

| Core topics about contract bridge. Generally, these topics are sub-articles of the main Contract bridge article, vital for a basic understanding of bridge or extremely notable to people outside the game. Topics of interest to an international audience. This category should be limited.

Inclusion criteria: Beginner/newcomer skill level introduction to contract bridge in general and on bidding, card play and scoring.

Exclusion criteria: Articles on specific bridge conventions except those in almost universal use. All articles on people, championships, governing bodies and books and magazines.

|Rubber bridge, Duplicate bridge, Chicago, Laws of Duplicate Bridge, Bidding system, Bridge scoring, Bridge conventions

|Splinter bid

{{High-importance}}

| Topics that are very notable within contract bridge, and not unheard of outside of it, and can be reasonably expected to be included in any print encyclopedia.

Inclusion criteria: Topics essential for someone who knows the basics of contract bridge at the beginner or intermediate level and who aspires to advanced or higher levels of understanding. Common card play techniques. Summaries of popularly used bidding systems. The most notable people in bridge - usually players and/or writers recognized internationally as world class - the most significant of those in a bridge Hall of Fame, but rarely administrators. People who, in their lifetime have achieved top 10 ranking by the World Bridge Federation. Books that are deemed classics. World championships and the most notable zonal, national and transnational competitions.

Exclusion criteria: Topics on less frequently used or obsolete bidding systems and conventions. Rarely encounterd card play situations or techniques or topics at a deeper and more complex level of detail. Articles on bridge governing bodies. All local and regional championships, national championships of lesser note. People who may be in a bridge Hall of Fame but are not recognized internationally as world class.

|Acol, Simple squeeze, Ely Culbertson

|Little Major, Stepping-stone squeeze, Nick Nickell

colspan="4" style="background:#FFCC00;"|It may seem paradoxical to an editor who is an avid bridge enthusiast that the more complex a bridge topic is, the more likely it requires a foundation of knowledge of the game to be able to absorb it and the more likely it is of greater interest and importance to an advancing or expert player and of lesser interest or importance to a non-player, beginner or intermediate level player who constitute the majority of encyclopedia readership. A true enthusiast buys a bridge book and does not rely on an encyclopedia!
{{Mid-importance}}

| Topics that are reasonably notable on a national level within contract bridge without necessarily being famous or very notable internationally. Conventions that are used by a significant minority of players or by a high-importance pair. Card play techniques that are occasionally encountered. People who are in a bridge Hall of Fame (or its deemed equivalent status) and are recognized nationally but are not recognized as notable world class players or writers. People who are recognized internationally as notable adminstrators.

|Serious 3NT, Fantunes

|

{{Low-importance}}

| Topics of mostly local interest or those that are only included for complete coverage or as examples of a higher-level topic; peripheral or trivial topics. Conventions that are not common anywhere. Card play techniques that are rare outside of composed positions. People who are notable within a national bridge community but are not in a bridge Hall of Fame or its deemed equivalent status.

|Hexagon squeeze, EHAA

|

{{Unknown-importance}}

|Topic has not been assessed

|

|

{{NA-importance}}

|Assessment is not applicable, not required

|Category, Templates, Project

|

{{WPCBIndex}}

Application

After assessing an article's quality and/or importance, any comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

= Requesting an assessment =

If you or others have made significant changes to an article since its last assessment and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please post your request at the talk page of the article and also list it below. The details of all assessment activity for an article belong with its talk pages. The list below is simply a secondary means to alert interested editors who may otherwise not be watching or visiting the page in question.

class="wikitable" width="90%"

!width="25%"|Article

width="40%"|What has changed?width="15%"|Requestorwidth="10%"|Datewidth="10%"|Reassessed
(Y/N)
valign="top"

|enter name of article

enter your rationale for requesting a reassessment; in quality or importaance or both?who are you?date of requestY/N

= Assessment log =

class=toccolours align=right

| Contract bridge articles:
{{WP1|Contract bridge}}

:The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Contract bridge articles by quality log}}

Contract bridgeCategory:WikiProject Contract bridge

{{clear}}

References

= Endnotes=

{{Reflist}}

= See also =