Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0/Grading scheme

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The following table summarizes the scheme for grading the quality of mathematics articles. It follows the Wikipedia 1.0 {{Grading scheme}}.

The quality gradings that can be assigned to an article, in rough order from highest to lowest, are FA (Featured Article), A, GA (Good Article), B, C, Start, and Stub. Detailed information is provided in the table.

Quality Criteria Reader's experience Examples
Editor's experience
Featured article FA
Reserved exclusively for articles that have received featured article status after peer review, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. Monty Hall problem (Oct 25, 2008)

Leonhard Euler (Mar 2, 2007)

No further editing is necessary unless new published information has come to light; but further improvements to the text are often possible.
A-Class article A
Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in "How to write a great article". It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, from text-books or peer-reviewed papers, rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status; corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-mathematician would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points. Golden ratio (Oct 25, 2008)

Albert Einstein (Oct 25, 2008)
Manifold (Mar 2, 2007)

Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage.
This class is for articles of at least B quality which have also passed through the good article nomination process and meet the good article standards. The article has all the positive elements of a B-class article, and may be regarded as a complete article. It is broad in its coverage, while staying focused on the topic; it is factually accurate, verifiable and neutral; and it is well presented, both in terms of grammar, and adherence to the main points in the Manual of Style. The article is well-referenced, and is illustrated, where appropriate, by an image or images which comply with copyright guidelines. Among mathematics articles these are some of the best. Note that the good article designation is not a requirement for A-Class. A-Class articles which meet good article standards should be considered for featured article status. Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject which attempts to be as accessible as possible, with a minimum of jargon. No obvious problems, gaps, excessive information. Has a more polished presentation, more illustrations (as appropriate), more detailed history, and more references that typical B-class. Homotopy groups of spheres (Oct 25, 2008)

Ordinal number (Mar 2, 2007)
Znám's problem (Oct 25, 2008)

Further editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience.
The article has several of the elements described in "start", and most of the material needed for a complete article; all major aspects of the subject are at least mentioned. Nonetheless, it has significant gaps or missing elements or references, needs substantial editing for English language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as some minor neutral point of view (NPOV) or no original research (NOR) concerns. With neutral point of view, a well-written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Useful to most, but not all, readers. An interested reader flipping through the article may feel that they generally understood the topic. However, it may not be as accessible as it could be, or it may be inadequate for a serious student or researcher trying to use the material, who might have trouble or risk error using the article in derivative work. Set (Mar 2, 2007)
Limit (mathematics) (Mar 2, 2007)
Vector space (Mar 2, 2007)
Some editing is still needed, including filling in some gaps or correcting policy errors. Articles for which cleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. May be improved by input from experts to assess where coverage is still missing, and also by illustrations, historical background and further references. Consider peer review or nominating for good article status. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time.
The majority of the material needed of a complete article is included, but there are significant areas that are not yet covered. The article may be poorly organized or still include questionable or irrelevant material. Good general references have been provided, but citations for some aspects or individual facts may still be missing or unclear. The text is at least readable enough for someone to understand the material, though there may be serious conflicts with Manual of Style guidelines. Diagrams essential for understanding the text are included. Useful to many readers. A reader would feel they generally understood the basics of the topic, but there are noticeable gaps in the material presented. There may be questionable or irrelevant material or the material may not be organized in a way that makes the subject easy to understand. Will be of little or no use to a serious student or researcher. Right Angle (Mar 23, 2010)
Ratio (Feb 23, 2010)
Sections covering significant aspects of the subject may still need to be added. Existing material may be poorly organized, so gathering material into meaningful sections or ordering the material to make an effective presentation may be necessary.
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element such as a standard infobox. For example an article on groups might cover the theory well, but be weak on history and motivation. 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
Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded. Hypergraph (Mar 2, 2007)
Esther Szekeres (Mar 2, 2007)
Theorem (Mar 2, 2007)
Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an article cleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage.
The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. Possibly useful to a mathematician who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a non-mathematician, or a reader only passingly familiar with the term. Ideally it is at least a brief, informed definition. Selig Brodetsky (Mar 2, 2007)
Parallel curve (Mar 2, 2007)
Algebraic number theory (Mar 2, 2007)
Any editing or additional material can be helpful.
Label Criteria Reader's experience Examples
Editor's experience
Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0/Grading scheme"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA