Wikipedia:WikiProject Spectroscopy/Assessment

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

center|50px Spectroscopy

General information

Main project page talk
Our banner talk
Assessment talk
Navigation talk

Welcome to the WikiProject Spectroscopy assessment department!

Project members are invited, under the guidance of this department, to tag articles by quality and importance using the {{SpectroscopyProject}} template, a full guide to which is provided below. These gradings help us to identify articles which we can put forward as featured article candidates or good article candidates, and to identify those which need more work.

This system is modelled on that used by WP:1.0, and it is understood that they may use our ratings in their system.


1. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{SpectroscopyProject}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else. However, we would appreciate it hugely if you could rate the article according to the guidelines below and leave a short summary of your rationale on the talk page.
2. What is the purpose of the article ratings? 
The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles we are interested in and helps to prioritize work. 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.
3. How can I get an article rated? 
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
4. Who can assess articles? 
Any Wikipedian, who has familiarized himself/herself with the guidelines below, is free to add or change the rating of an article.
5. 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.
6. 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 raise your objections on the article talk page.
7. Aren't the ratings subjective? 
Yes, they are subjective, especially concerning importance. However, it's the best system we've been able to devise. And it works pretty well for many different WikiProjects. If you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!
8. What if I have a question not listed here? 
Ask questions on the talk page.



An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{SpectroscopyProject}}. See the template page for more detailed instructions.

{{SpectroscopyProject| ... | class=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Spectroscopy articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.


An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{SpectroscopyProject}}. See the template page for more detailed instructions.

{{SpectroscopyProject| ... | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed-importance Spectroscopy articles. The class should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Quality scale

WikiProject article quality grading scheme

Importance scale

We recognize that importance is a relative term. An article judged to be "Top-Class" in one context may be only "Mid-Class" in another. Any importance ratings applied by this project, only reflect the perceived importance to this project. The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather it should serve as a guideline for project participants to determine which article should receive more attention.

Article importance grading scheme
Label Criteria Examples
Top Definition: Subject is a must-have for a concise print encyclopedia or other reference work on Spectroscopy. High probability that non-spectroscopists would look this up.

Practical tip: these subjects just pops into your head when you think about Spectroscopy and a specific field

High Definition: Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopaedia. Is reasonably expected to be included into more comprehensive printed encyclopedia.

Practical tip: you know the subject and most likely would be able to recall it without looking at any sources

Mid Definition: Subject fills in more minor details, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of another topic. Could only be included in a multi-volume encyclopedia.

Practical tip: most likely you will recognize the subject if someone mentions it to you

Low Definition: Subject is peripheral knowledge, possibly trivial.

Practical tip: most likely you will not recognize the subject


Requests for assessment

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below.

  1. Hydrogen spectral series - another pair of eyes welcome. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 02:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
  2. Mossbauer Spectroscopy Stokerm (talk) 03:37, 21 March 2009
  3. Mossbauer Spectroscopy SciHound (talk) 20:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
  4. Spectroscopy ronningt (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
  5. History of Spectroscopy ronningt (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:WikiProject Spectroscopy/Assessment"; 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