Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Japan (Talk)

Founded: 18 March 2006
(17 years, 11 months and 24 days ago)
Articles: 91,076 (180 featured)

Shortcuts
WP:JA • WP:JP • WP:JPN • WP:WPJ • WP:Japan • WP:JAPAN

Project pages

Article guidelines • Assessment • Barnsensu • Collaboration • Recognized content • Popular pages • Requested (Japan, government, anime & manga, seiyū) • Reviews (A-Class, Peer) • Translation • Participants (inactive) • ToDo (cleanup)

Project references

Arts and crafts glossary • Film credits glossary • Reference library • Unusual place names • Year conversion

Task forces

Ainu • Baseball↔ • Bibliography • Biography • Business & economy • Cars • Cinema↔ • CJKV↔ • Culture • Districts and municipalities (guideline)↔ • Education • Flora and fauna • Food and drink • Gaijin tarento • Geography & environment • History • Infrastructure • Karate↔ • Law & government • Military history↔ • Music • Mythology • Owarai • Photo • Politics • Prefectures • Religion • Royalty and nobility • Science & technology • Shinto • Sport • Tokyo • Transwiki↔ • Update
↔ = joint task force

Project links

Category • Deletions • List • Japan • Meta • MOS (Japan, Anime, municipality guideline) • New articles • Notice board • Portals: Japan, Ancient Japan, Anime, Buddhism, Final Fantasy, Japanese cars, Nintendo, Osaka, PlayStation, Sega, Shinto, Tokyo

Child projects

Anime and manga (Dragon Ball, Yu-Gi-Oh!) • Entertainment (Hello! Project, Tokusatsu) • Games (Digimon, Final Fantasy, Nintendo, PlayStation, Pokémon, Square Enix, Zelda) • Japan (Sumo, Trains/New)

Related pages

Categories (Lists, Wikipedians) • Projects (Automobiles, Computer and video games, F1, Martial Arts, Mixed martial arts, MotoGP, Motorcycling, Motorsport, Sports Car Racing, WRC)

Recognition

{{WPJ-Barnsensu}} (recipients)   {{WikiProject Japan Barnstar 2.0}} (recipients)   {{The Japan Barnstar of National Merit}} (recipients)   {{The Most Noble Barnstar of National Honor}} (recipients)

Templates

{{WikiProject Japan}}   {{Japan current era date}}   {{Japanese}}   {{nihongo}}   {{Nihongo2}}   {{Nihongo3}}   {{Nihongo foot}}   {{Needhiragana}}   {{Needkanji}}

Userboxes

{{User WikiProject Japan}}   {{User WP Japan}}

Project parentage

Asia, Countries, East Asia, Geography

V·T·E·Q115724607 on Wikidata

Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Japan! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Japan-related articles. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP: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 Japan}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Japan-related articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

You can jump down to get an article assessed.

Japan-related articles by quality statistics[edit]

 Click to view Japan-related articles by quality statistics
Japan-related articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 5 42 50 44 141
FL 13 6 14 33
FM 126 126
A 2 2 2 6
GA 8 49 118 329 1 505
B 55 251 699 945 51 2,001
C 90 646 1,781 3,722 289 6,528
Start 34 1,071 7,337 26,169 1,085 35,696
Stub 151 3,641 36,508 2 2,741 43,043
List 7 82 523 1,887 71 184 2,754
Category 1 2 18,780 18,783
Disambig 2 8 581 2 593
File 8 351 359
Portal 143 143
Project 1 156 157
Redirect 1 18 180 847 1,892 2,938
Template 1 3 3 7 2,052 2,066
NA 3 3
Other 2 10 163 175
Assessed 201 2,328 14,345 70,503 24,320 4,353 116,050
Unassessed 14 330 344
Total 201 2,328 14,345 70,517 24,320 4,683 116,394
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 469,852 Ω = 5.34

Frequently asked questions[edit]

 Click to view FAQs
How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
Just add {{WikiProject Japan}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
Someone put the template on an article, but it's not a Japan related topic. What should I do?
Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
What is the purpose of the article ratings?
The objective of the rating system is twofold. First, it allows the project to monitor the quality of the articles within our scope and to prioritize work on these articles. Second, the ratings will be used by the Wikipedia 1.0 project to compile a "released version" of Wikipedia that can be distributed to readers. Please note, however, that these ratings are meant for the internal use of the project, and do not imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of WikiProject Japan is free to add or change the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes. Editors should also note that assessments of B or A require project consensus, while GA, FA, and FL assessments have associated formal review processes that must be followed.
How do I rate an article?
Check the assessment scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article, then follow the guidelines below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
How can I make a request for someone from the project to assess an article?
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
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.
Where can I get more details or feedback about an article?
The peer review process is one that results in a more thorough examination of articles; to ensure project members also view the article, make sure to list it at our peer review page.
What if I don't agree with a rating?
You can list it in the section 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 the importance scale), but it's the best system we've been able to devise; if you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!
What about lists?
Lists of various kinds are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status. Lists which are pure lists of links, however, should be assessed as list class, as they have no real content to be evaluated.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department.

Assessment scales[edit]

 Click to view assessment scale

Quality scale[edit]

The scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
 FA The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured article criteria:

A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary 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.[under discussion] Japan
(as of March 2009)
More examples

Toilets in Japan
(as of March 2009)
Imperial Japanese Navy
(as of March 2009)
 FL The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit 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. Tallest buildings and structures in Tokyo
(as of March 2009)
More examples

Japanese submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film
(as of March 2009)

 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 the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia: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 a featured 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. Japanese battleship Haruna
(as of March 2009)
More examples

Tengu
(as of March 2009)
 GA The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations.
More detailed criteria
A good article is:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could 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);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable 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 existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. Matsuo Bashō
(as of March 2009)
More examples

ASIMO
(as of March 2009)
Japanese battleship Musashi
(as of March 2009)
Shogun
(as of March 2009)

B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
More detailed criteria
  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
  3. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical 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 the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. Akihabara massacre
(as of March 2009)
More examples

Demographics of Japan
(as of March 2009)
Hokkaidō
(as of March 2009)
Yasukuni Shrine
(as of March 2009)
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 substantial cleanup.
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 solve cleanup problems. Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
(as of March 2009)
More examples

History of Japan
(as of March 2009)
Wasabi
(as of March 2009)
Greater Tokyo Area
(as of March 2009)

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 to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. Onyanko Club
(as of March 2009)
More examples

400 Series Shinkansen
(as of March 2009)
Champon
(as of March 2009)
Shimazu Yoshihiro
(as of March 2009)
Ōta Dōkan
(as of March 2009)
Yayoi period
(as of March 2009)

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. 36 Views of Mount Fuji (Hokusai)
(as of March 2009)
More examples

Gjiten
(as of March 2009)
Zōshigaya Station
(as of March 2009)
Ōzu, Kumamoto
(as of March 2009)
Ureshino, Saga
(as of March 2009)

List Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set 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 volcanoes in Japan (as of March 2009)
More examples

Zepp
(as of March 2009)
List of washi
(as of March 2009)
List of Noh plays: A-M
(as of March 2009)
Hikaru Utada discography
(as of March 2009)
Parks and gardens in Tokyo
(as of March 2009)

These criteria apply to general-content articles. The manual of style provides additional guidelines about what sorts of content and formatting should be provided for certain articles.

Each Japan-related article has its assessment included within the {{WikiProject Japan}} template, such as {{WikiProject Japan|class=B}}. This provides automatic categorization within Category:Japan-related articles by quality. Note that the class parameter is case-specific; see the template's documentation for more information.

B-Class criteria[edit]

Special emphasis is given to the six criteria that B-Class articles for the WikiProject should meet:

B
  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
  3. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.


Importance scale[edit]

Priority (or importance) must be regarded as a relative term. If priority values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the article falls under. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it).

Type Top High Mid Low
Definition Core topics (e.g., Japan, Shinto, History of Japan). Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia. High probability that non-Japanophiles would look this up. Must have had a large impact outside of Japan and be known in the majority of the world. For example, Sushi is very popular worldwide and known in most of the world. No member should give this rating to any article without first getting Project approval from the other members. Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopedia. Must have had a large impact in Japan, and had some impact outside Japan, as well as sub-articles of core topics (e.g., Edo period, Yasukuni Shrine). Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Important in Japan, but not necessarily known as well outside of Japan. (e.g., Sakurajima, Recycling in Japan). This article is of little importance as it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.

Requests for assessment[edit]

Please refer to this page when determining if an article meets the individual B-Class criteria checklist items.

  • Jurina Matsui - This article was assessed as Start in 2014. I overhauled and basically rewrote everything and fixed all citations so it meets Wikipedia's Manual of Style. I believe it deserves at least to be rated B, but feel free to leave some suggestions how to improve it. Yolo4A4Lo (talk) 09:01, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sandaime J Soul Brothers - This article has been considerably expanded on and improved since the last time it was assessed. I strongly believe it can be updated for a B rating. Thank you. Takacchin10_10 (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • sports in Japan I don’t know when this article was last assessed or if has ever been assessed but it’s of top class importance and seems well flushed out so I believe it’s deserving of a higher rating although I can not say that I am a contributor towards it but it seems silly for it to stay as such an important article and yet be rated so low

Thanks Goldsoldier75 (talk) 16:46, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AKB48 I believe it is worthy of between B and A class as it is very very well researched and well written and it’s considered of high importance and is a good enough article that in my humble opinion may one day in the not so far future be worthy of a ga or even fa Thanks Goldsoldier75 (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Kunisada Station First time trying to upgrade an article. Looking for assessment to understand a bit better where it stands --Aziretan (talk) 2:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Requests for external assessment[edit]

Purge this page's server cache Today's featured article requests

Did you know

A-Class review

Good article nominees

(2 more...)

Peer reviews

Log[edit]

A full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly.

See also[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Japan/Assessment&oldid=1167748412"