![]() | ![]() | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Spaceflight}} project banner on its talk page:To assess an article, using the rating scheme described below, fill in the parameters on the Spaceflight banner on the article's talk page:
{{WikiProject Spaceflight |class= |importance= }}
Request new assessment
You can request an article is assessed. If you are not sure what the assessment should be or have recently done work to an article, list the article at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight/Assessment/Requests, along with what changes have occured since the last assessment and if you wish, quality, importance or both to be reassessed.
- Class
{{WikiProject Spaceflight|class=???|importance=???}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:
- FA (for featured articles only, adds articles to Category:FA-Class spaceflight articles)
- FL (for featured lists only, adds articles to Category:FL-Class spaceflight articles)
- A (not currently in use, adds articles to Category:A-Class spaceflight articles)
- GA (for good articles only, adds articles to Category:GA-Class spaceflight articles)
- B (must have passed all B-Class criteria, adds articles to Category:B-Class spaceflight articles)
- C (adds articles to Category:C-Class spaceflight articles)
- Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class spaceflight articles)
- Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class spaceflight articles)
- List (adds articles to Category:List-Class spaceflight articles)
For pages that are not articles, the following values can also be used for the class parameter:
- Category (adds categories to Category:Category-Class spaceflight articles)
- Disambiguation (adds disambiguation pages to Category:Disambig-Class spaceflight articles)
- File (adds files to Category:File-Class spaceflight articles)
- Portal (adds portals to Category:Portal-Class spaceflight articles)
- Project (adds project pages to Category:Project-Class spaceflight articles)
- Redirect (adds redirects to Category:Redirect-Class spaceflight articles)
- Template (adds templates to Category:Template-Class spaceflight articles)
- NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class spaceflight articles)
- ??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed spaceflight articles)
The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
- Importance
{{WikiProject Spaceflight|class=???|importance=???}}
The following values may be used for the importance parameter:
- Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance spaceflight articles)
- High (adds articles to Category:High-importance spaceflight articles)
- Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance spaceflight articles)
- Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance spaceflight articles)
- NA (for all non article-space pages; book, category, disambiguation etc. Adds to Category:NA-importance spaceflight articles)
The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.
Quality scale
The criteria for assessing the quality of articles are based based on the assessment standards of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. When the scopes of our project and Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history overlap, their criteria for A and B-Class status should take precedence. Otherwise:
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() | Reserved for articles that have received featured article status after community review.
| 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. | Hubble Space Telescope | ||
![]() | A-Class articles are assessed by two editors within the project to determine that they are close to featured article status. Submit a request for an assessment the same way you would for a B-class article; the only difference is two reviewers will assess it.
| Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to "tweak" the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help. | None | ||
![]() | Reserved for articles that have received Good article status after community review.
| Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. | 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. | CryoSat-2 | ||
B | The article is mostly complete, without major issues, but requires some further work to reach Good Article standards.
| No reader should be 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, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the manual of style. | Jules Verne ATV | ||
C | The article meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria.
| 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 address cleanup issues. | Eugene Cernan | ||
Start | The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, may lack one or more key elements, and may require serious cleanup. It should have at least one serious element of content, and should not meet the definition of a stub.
| Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more. | Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation. | Sputnik 2 | ||
Stub | The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information which will require a large amount of work to achieve recognition. It meets the general definition of a Stub.
| Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. | International Designator |
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() | Reserved for articles that have received featured article status after community review.
| 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. | List of ISS spacewalks | ||
List | 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. | 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 space agencies |
Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|
Category | Any category falls under this class. | Categories (along with other features like cross-references, lists, and infoboxes) help users find information, even if they don't know that it exists or what it's called. | Be aware not to over-categorise and to be careful of maintaining a neutral point of view when creating or filling categories. Make decisions about the structure of categories and subcategories that make it easy for users to browse through similar articles. | Category:Russian cosmonauts |
Disambig | Any disambiguation page falls under this class. | Serves to distinguish article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic. | Pay particular attention to the proper naming of disambiguation articles, they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title. | Mercury 1 |
File | Any page in the file namespace falls under this class. | Images are used to help explain articles by providing examples of style, lay-out, logo, or other typical visual aspects. Many images are fair use and should be used sparingly. Public domain or Creative Commons / GFDL licensed images can be used more freely. | Editors need to ensure that images have correct licenses, fair use rationales (where applicable), and are only used in articles for which they have such rationale. Fair use images should not be used as pure decoration. | Image:Apollo 11 bootprint.jpg |
Portal | Any page in the portal namespace falls under this class. | Portals are useful entry-points to Wikipedia content. | Editors need to ensure the portal is kept updated and displays properly, updating news sections and looking out for red links. | Portal:Spaceflight |
Project | All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class. | Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development, and are probably not useful to readers. | Develop these pages into collaborative resources useful for improving articles within the project. | Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight |
Redirect | Any redirect in the article namespace falls under this class. | A redirect takes reader to another article relevant to the article they wanted. | Ensure article is still redirect, otherwise re-assess. | HEASARC (as of December 2010) |
Template | Is any type of template. The most common types of template used in the WikiProject are infoboxes and navboxes. | Serves different purposes depending upon the type of template. Infoboxes go at the upper right of a page and are a way of providing easy access to important pieces of introductory infomation about the subject. Navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page, and are for the purpose of uniting a group of related articles into an easily accessible format for inclusion on every page listed in the navbox. | Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information. | Template:Shenzhou program |
NA | Is not an article, and fits no other classification. | Probably not useful to any casual reader, these are typically only WikiProject pages. | Look out for mis-classified articles. Currently many NA-class articles need to be re-classified. | None |
Importance scale
The articles are rated for their importance to spaceflight. When making importance assessments, it may be helpful to ask, "How important would it be for the topic of spaceflight to include this article in an abridged version of the encyclopedia?"
Three different ways of expressing the priority of articles are currently used.
- The importance, significance and depth of the topic within its particular field or subject.
- The extent of the topic's impact, usually in the sense of "impact beyond its particular field", but it is also used to express global impact, and impact through history.
- The bottom line: how important is it for an encyclopaedia to have an article on the given topic?
These are often different ways of saying the same thing, but the current WP 1.0 summary table mixes the three approaches: Top priority is described using method 3, High and Mid priority using method 1, and Low priority using method 2.
The table below of possible spaceflight importance levels provides more detail on the meaning of the individual levels, as well as examples.
Priority | Description | Concepts | Spaceflights and spacecraft | People | Other |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | An absolute "must-have" spaceflight article. | Top 5–10 conceptual articles | Top 10–20 individual spaceflights, and top 5–10 spacecraft types | Top 5–10 key historical figures, astronauts who achieved significant firsts | Major space agencies |
High | Very much needed, even vital, spaceflight articles. | Main concepts and components of spaceflight | High-profile single spaceflights, highly-used "series" spacecraft | Astronauts of above-average notability; including Vostok cosmonauts and Mercury Seven, people who have flown beyond Earth orbit | |
Mid | Adds further depth, but not vital to spaceflight. | Most well-known concepts and components of spaceflight | Most non-routine spaceflights, most crewed spaceflights | All professional astronauts who took part in a spaceflight, and aren't high or top importance | |
Low | Not at all essential, or can be covered adequately by other articles. | Most spacecraft subsystems | Routine spaceflights, many non-unique spacecraft | Professional astronauts who have not taken part in a spaceflight, most people not crucially related to spaceflight. | Cancelled missions |
(None) | This rating is not used. There is a Category:Unknown-importance spaceflight articles for articles which have a spaceflight rating, but no importance level: editors should feel free either to assign an importance level (Low-Priority or higher) or remove the spaceflight banner from these articles, if they are outside the project's scope.
|
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. B-Class requests are assessed using the six B-class criteria.
Articles to be assessed
Draft:List of Launches review
- 71.183.212.131 (talk) 12:08, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!
I'm afraid neither of these articles can be approved. The first has a weird formatting problem where every word in the lede is linked, and the second duplicates our Timeline articles. If you'd like some mentoring on how to produce usable Spaceflight articles, I'll be happy to assist. :) Just leave me a message on my Talk page. --Neopeius (talk) 14:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- I understood and fixed the issue on the first article. My second article is a list of every single launch, which is obviously going to have most of it’s launches covered elsewhere, but not all are. Can you rereview the first one and explain more clearly the issue with the second one? Thank you!
- 71.183.212.131 (talk) 12:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Draft:List of Atlas LV3A launches – C-Class – Low importance review
- 71.183.212.131 (talk) 12:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Can someone please review his article for C-Class? Thanks in advance.
- 71.183.212.131 (talk) 22:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
SpaceX floating launch platform review
- Somewhat recently created, no rating on quality or importance.
- N828335 (talk) 01:43, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
[[Draft:Starship SN11]] review
- 64.121.103.144 (talk) 12:49, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
[[Draft:Starship SN15]] review
- 64.121.103.144 (talk) 12:50, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello, all!
Normally I'm not reticent about rating my own articles up to B class, but given the high visibility of the Mariner missions, and since I plan to reuse much of the text I've done on this latest article for Mariner 2, I wonder if a friend could review Mariner 1 and determine if it be a B (and if you think it good enough for GA, let me know, and I'll start that process). Once I'm confident in the language, I can get to work on Mariner 2. :)
Thank you! --Neopeius (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- I have been working on this article for about two and a half months now and I feel it has gotten up to par. I have added images of its flyby targets and the schematics for the actual probe itself, and even found primary sources detailing the spacecraft itself. I also translated the page to Chinese so people in China (where the probe is actually from) can actually view the article for itself (the grammar may be a bit off, but it could be fixed). I am unsure how important the spacecraft actually is, but I feel it should be just as important as Trident, considering they both are targeting the same planet.
- TheWhistleGag (talk) 14:04, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hello! Thank you for this fine start on the article. A couple of things I would want to see before getting to B-class: there are some awkward phrasings and non sequiturs in the text -- I recommend reading the article aloud to spot the sharp corners. Also, you indicate that details are scant but briefly touch on the experiments that may be carried. Is there really no listing at all? Nor even a proposed rocket to be used? --Neopeius (talk) 13:51, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hello ~Neopeius! Thank you for giving me these criteria. I have updated the page and I hope that it fits these criteria better than it used to. I have removed non-sequiturs and made sure that the text flowed better together. TheWhistleGag (talk) 00:13, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
- I rewrote this article some time ago, translated parts from the Intalian FA, and uploaded better images. English is not my native lang, so please review it. (In theory, I'd like to nominate it to GA, but I'm not sure about it.)
- Artem.G (talk) 09:58, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Quite a good article! I gave it a B. For GA, you'll want to link some of the more abstruse technical terms like spectrometer. I also always recommend reading an article aloud to catch awkward bits. :) --Neopeius (talk) 13:44, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Soyuz TM-22 review
- Found some sources and added it to the article. I'm new, but I'd like a sanity check before I continue on with others. I'm not sure the rating system. Thanks in advance!
- Kilawyn Punx (talk) 18:11, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Good article. Well the addition of more sources is great, it still lacks enough sources for a higher quality class. It is also lacking in supporting material. Well there are plenty of images provided, 4 of the 7 are practically identical, and do little to support the article. The addition of other images from the mission would improve the article. I've given it a start rating due to lacking references.James Denesuk (talk) 02:45, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- I guess the issue is this: this article, and the one preceding it, are now extremely thorough chronologies of these two TM missions. And yet, is it really appropriate to have this chronology of events happening to the station the TM was attached to? The TM isn't doing anything but sitting there. I should think a more useful article format would be to have a short background of the TM Soyuz, describe the crew and launch, perhaps have a paragraph on significant ISS actions that occurred during its docking, and then describe the capsule's return to Earth, followed by a Legacy section describing where it is now, references in the media, etc.
- In other words, folks aren't going to Soyuz TM-22 for info on Expedition 20 -- they go to Expedition 20 for that. I think this long article on incidentally related station activities is the wrong format. If there is information in your articles not currently in the Expedition 20 page, then by all means, find ways to incorporate them there.
- My two cents. :) --Neopeius (talk) 17:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with you. The long term nature of the missions is what I'm really interested in (and the space research!) but the Expedition articles for the most part (except 19 because it started with a shuttle mission) are just redirects to the Soyuz articles. Being new I didn't feel comfortable creating a bunch of articles for the long term missions, but I can create them and move the information over if you and James would feel that would be a better way to present the information. Thanks for the feedback, it's exactly the kind I was looking for! Kilawyn Punx (talk) 17:56, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- My two cents. :) --Neopeius (talk) 17:00, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- I've spent the last several months working on the article. Since I've started the article has become around seven times the original size. I'm hoping that at this point the article has improved in quality that in theory could be nominated to a GA rating, but I'm unsure if it's reached that point yet.
- James Denesuk (talk) 02:36, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Rocket Lab – GA-Class – Mid importance review
- Starship SN20 (talk) 21:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- C class. Last sentence of "Launch Complex 1" needs a reference. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed and is now B class. How well does it stack up against the GA class criteria now @Hawkeye7 Starship 24 (talk) 22:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- C class. Last sentence of "Launch Complex 1" needs a reference. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Yaogan – C-Class – Low importance review
- Page overhaul
- RightQuark (talk) 02:16, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
This article was already reviewed. Thank you!
Rocket lab – B-Class – Mid importance review
Already reviewed, thank you!
Summary
- Please review as a starting point for the Artemis program.
- Starship 24 (talk) 15:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Frank E. Rom – B-Class review
Created last year. Only just tagged by WP:BIO Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- This article is, in my opinion, no longer a stub.
- Sub31k (talk) 21:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
- Made it start class El Wikipedian (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- I believe I've fixed most of the issues on this page. It used to be a GA, but it got delisted. I'm working on bringing it back up, and I think it's pretty close.
- ARandomName123 (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC)