Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Main pageDiscussionNews &
open tasks

The assessment department of the Military history WikiProject focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's military history articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the Version 1.0 Editorial Team program.



The assessment system used by the Military history WikiProject to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assess lists and similar non-prose articles. The progression of articles along these scales is described in greater detail below.

Prose article List article
Stub The first stage of an article's evolution is called a stub. A stub is an extremely short article that provides a basic description of the topic at best; it includes very little meaningful content, and may be little more than a dictionary definition. At this stage, it is often impossible to determine whether the topic should be covered by a prose article or a list, so this assessment level is shared between the two scales.
Arrow southwest.svg
Arrow southeast.svg
Start List A stub that undergoes some development will progress to the next stage of article evolution. An article at this stage provides some meaningful content, but is typically incomplete and lacks adequate references, structure, and supporting materials. At this stage, it becomes possible to distinguish between prose articles and lists; depending on its form, an article at this level will be assessed as a Start-Class prose article or a List-Class list.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
C CL As the article continues to develop, it will reach the C-Class level. At this stage, the article is reasonably structured and contains substantial content and supporting materials, but may still be incomplete or poorly referenced, but not both. As articles progress to this stage, the assessment process begins to take on a more structured form, and specific criteria are introduced against which articles are rated.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
B BL An article that reaches the B-Class level is complete in content and structure, adequately referenced, and includes reasonable supporting materials; overall, it provides a satisfactory encyclopedic presentation of the topic for the average reader, although it might not be written to the standard that would be expected by an expert. Articles at this stage commonly undergo peer review to solicit ideas for further improvement. B-Class is the final assessment level that can be reached without undergoing a formal review process, and is a reasonable goal for newer editors.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
GA After reaching the B-Class level, an article may be submitted for assessment as a good article. Good articles must meet a set of criteria similar to those required for the B-Class assessment level, and must additionally undergo the formal good article review process. This assessment level is available only for prose articles; no comparable level exists for lists.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
A-Class article A A-Class list AL A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for the A-Class assessment level. An A-Class article presents a complete and thorough encyclopedic treatment of a subject, such as might be written by an expert in the field; the only deficiencies permissible at this level are minor issues of style or language. To receive an A-Class rating, a candidate article must undergo the formal military history A-Class review process. The A-Class rating is the highest assessment level that may be assigned by an individual WikiProject; higher assessment levels are granted only by Wikipedia-wide independent assessment processes.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
Featured article FA Featured list FL The featured article and featured list ratings represent the pinnacle of article evolution and the best that Wikipedia has to offer; an article at this level is professional, outstanding, and represents a definitive source for encyclopedic information. Featured status is assigned only through a thorough independent review process; this process can be grueling for the unprepared, and editors are highly advised to submit articles for A-Class review prior to nominating them for featured status.


The following tables summarize the criteria used to assess articles at each level of the quality assessment scale. In addition to the criteria, the tables list the assessment process used at each level and provide an example of an article previously assessed at that level.

Assessment criteria for prose articles
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
Featured article FA The article meets all the featured article criteria. Featured article candidacy USS Chesapeake (as of June 2011)
A-Class article A The article meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review Lockheed D-21 (as of June 2011)
GA The article meets all of the good article criteria. Good article review Al-Mundhir III ibn al-Harith (as of June 2011)
B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. Individual review Battle of Guttstadt-Deppen (as of June 2011)
C The article meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review Incident at Xuanwu Gate (as of June 2011)
Start The article meets the Start-Class criteria. Individual review Paris Declaration Respecting Maritime Law (as of June 2011)
Stub The article meets none of the Start-Class criteria. Individual review Eagle Point National Cemetery (as of June 2011)
Assessment criteria for lists
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
Featured list FL The list meets all the featured list criteria. Featured list candidacy Army of the Danube order of battle (as of June 2012)
A-Class list AL The list meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review List of battlecruisers of the United States (as of May 2012)
BL The list meets all of the B-Class criteria. Individual review List of hill forts in England (as of June 2012)
CL The list meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review List of assault rifles (as of June 2012)
List The list meets the List-Class criteria. Individual review List of Airborne Artillery Units (as of June 2012)
Stub The list meets none of the List-Class criteria. Individual review List of supercavitating torpedoes (as of June 2012)


This section describes the different processes used to assess the quality of military history articles.

Individual review[edit]

The individual review process is used for all assessment activities up to the B-Class level. In this process, any editor may review an article against the listed criteria and assign the corresponding quality rating themselves.

Article authors are free to assess their own articles under this process. However, by convention, the final assessment for a B-Class rating is typically left to an independent editor; requests for an independent assessment may be made at the assessment request page.

Peer review[edit]

The peer review process is not used to evaluate an article for a particular assessment level directly; rather, it is a forum where article authors can solicit ideas for further improvements. Peer review is most often requested when an article is at the C-Class or B-Class level; articles at lower levels are typically so incomplete that a meaningful review is impossible, while articles at higher levels go through more formal review processes.

By convention, military history articles are typically listed in the history section of the main peer review request page; however, articles may be listed in other sections if their primary topic lies in another field.

Good article review[edit]

The good article nomination process is an independent review mechanism through which an article receives a "good article" quality rating. The process involves a detailed review of the article by an independent examiner, who determines whether the article meets the good article criteria.

Full instructions for requesting a good article review are provided on the good article review page.

A-Class article/list review[edit]

The military history A-Class review process is the most thorough and demanding assessment of article quality done by the Military history WikiProject. An article that undergoes this process must be reviewed by at least three independent examiners, each of whom must agree that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria.

Full instructions for requesting an A-Class review are provided on the A-Class review page.

Featured article/list candidacy[edit]

The featured article candidacy and featured list candidacy processes are an independent, Wikipedia-wide quality assessment mechanism; these processes are the only way an article can receive a "featured" quality rating. The process involves a comprehensive review of the article by multiple independent examiners, all of whom must agree that the article meets the featured article or list criteria.

Full instructions for submitting a featured article or list candidacy are provided on the corresponding candidacy page. Editors are advised to carefully review the submission instructions; failing to follow them correctly may cause the submission to be rejected.


An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPMILHIST}} project banner on its talk page:


The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:

The class parameter should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following classes may be used for non-article pages; many are automatically generated by the template when it is placed on a page of the corresponding type:


See also the general assessment FAQ and the project's B-Class assessment & criteria FAQ and A-Class review & criteria FAQ.
1. What is the purpose of the article ratings? 
The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 
Just add {{WPMILHIST}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WPMILHIST}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. 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).
4. Who can assess articles? 
Any member of the Military history WikiProject 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.
5. Can I assess articles that I have written or contributed significantly to? 
For the most part, yes—in fact, you are encouraged to do so. B-Class assessment, by convention, is generally undertaken by an independent editor (requests can be made here), and A-Class promotion requires the consensus of multiple independent reviewers. However, if your article falls within the Stub- to C-Class range, by awarding the rating yourself you are helping to prevent the assessment requests process becoming overloaded.
6. How do I rate an article? 
Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions 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.
7. Can I request that someone else rate an article? 
Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
8. 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.
9. Where can I get more comments about an article? 
The peer review process can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
10. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
11. Aren't the ratings subjective? 
Yes, they are somewhat subjective, 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!
12. 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 go to the main project discussion page, or contact the project coordinators directly.


Requests for A-Class review[edit]

MarcianIFF Mark IIEmanuel Moravec57th Rifle Division (Soviet Union)Razing of FriesoytheTerritorial ForceMAUD CommitteeSoviet cruiser Admiral IsakovTrident (UK nuclear programme)Tower Hill MemorialList of torpedo cruisers of ItalyJapanese battleship IseJames P. HagerstromHarry LaurentList of ironclad warships of Austria-HungaryErsatz Monarch-class battleshipArab–Khazar warsJohann Heinrich von Schmitt32nd Infantry Division Triglavski

Requests for assessment[edit]

Please note that this section is transcluded from a separate requests page, which you may wish to add to your watchlist.

Editors can self-assess articles against the five B-class criteria(FAQ) up to and including C-Class. If you have made significant improvements to an article against one or more of B-class criteria and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below, specifying which criteria you have worked on. If you feel unable to assess against one or more of the B-class criteria, please say so when posting. Requests for formal A-Class review should be made at the review department. Please consider entering articles you have improved in the military history article writing contest.

  • Benjamin_Franklin_Cooling. Another CW historian. auntieruth (talk) 17:02, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Nice work, Ruth. Thanks for your efforts. I've assessed as C class as the coverage seems a little light for B class. Happy to discuss, though, if you disagree. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Vance Drummond -- new article on NZ-born RAAF pilot who survived close calls in Korea and Vietnam only to die in a training exercise off the Australian coast. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Nice work, Ian. One suggestion, could it be clarified what his role in J Force was (i.e. infantry or some other branch/corps?) Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:33, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
      • Tks Rupert -- ADB offers minimal info but perhaps my GAN reviewer can point me to more details about his time in the NZ military... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
        • Ian Rose, how's this? Looks like he was a signaler which may tie in with his WWII experience in the RNZAF. Zawed (talk) 09:29, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
          • Tks, might continue discussion on the article talk page. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Gaius Julius Quadratus Bassus Roman general under Trajan wishes to be considered for B class. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Greetings the references needs some links of the books in the page then its a B-class. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 20:58, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Greeetings and thanks to CPA-5. Links to Google Books added. No link for Eck as it is a journal article. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:17, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Is it posible to link the journal article? If it can and the link is add in the page, then in my view it looks like a B-class. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 14:01, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
@Kges1901: Thank you for your recent work on articles for the 213th and 214th Pennsylvania Volunteers. As someone who has been working on trying to improve the articles about regiments from the Keystone State, it's always great to see others giving attention to these articles. (And many thanks to you as well, @CPA-5:, for your input.) With respect, I'd like to ask that this particular review be re-opened. The content of the article's history section seems too brief right now to be awarded B-class, particularly for a regiment that was involved in the capture of one of the major conspirators in the Lincoln assassination. Additionally, the use of the phrase "7th Union League" as part of the title of the regiment (see par. 1) may be incorrect. (The names of the regiments were almost always written in one of several ways - "213th Regiment, Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry", "213th Pennsylvania Infantry", or "213th Pennsylvania Volunteers", for example, and did not include the names of sponsoring organizations like the Union League.) For reference, the Pennsylvania State Archives in its listing of this regiment on its website for the state's "Registers of Pennsylvania Volunteers, 1861-1865" (containing the digitized versions of the actual registers), does not include the reference to "7th Union League" in the regiment's title. So, perhaps a strong C-Class for now? 47thPennVols (talk) 01:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
@47thPennVols: Thanks for the compliments. I included the name 7th Union League since sources like Taylor and other contemporary sources referred to the Union League regiments by the sequence they were raised, sometimes without noting the state designation; in fact, the US AG office recognized the Union League numbering sequence as a synonym in 1885.[1] I do not feel that there is too little on the capture of Atzerodt considering that a more detailed account of his capture belongs on the Atzerodt page and only one officer of the regiment was involved (albeit the major) – the actual capture was made by men from the 1st Delaware Cavalry. Kges1901 (talk) 01:12, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Assessment backlogs[edit]

Please help to clear any backlogs of unassessed articles in the following categories:


Task forces (general topics)[edit]

Task forces (national and regional)[edit]

Task forces (periods and conflicts)[edit]

Special projects[edit]

Operation Majestic Titan assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase I) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase II) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase III) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase IV) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase V) assessment statistics