Elite Dangerous Wiki:Article assessment: Difference between revisions
Set up local article assessments and daily selection |
Enable measurable reference checks in maintenance report |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
These categories contain the discussion pages carrying the banners. They are not automatic assurances that article content is correct. |
These categories contain the discussion pages carrying the banners. They are not automatic assurances that article content is correct. |
||
== Automated maintenance checks == |
|||
[[User:EliteMaintenanceBot|EliteMaintenanceBot]] checks articles through a bounded local queue. Its [[User:EliteMaintenanceBot/Maintenance report|maintenance report]] flags missing files, missing templates, reference errors and articles with no rendered inline citations. References supplied by templates count too. An article without inline citations may still contain external links or use in-game evidence; this finding asks an editor to review its sourcing. |
|||
These checks do not assign assessment classes or approve Good or Featured status. Findings are refreshed when pages are rescanned. Pages not yet checked are not certified clean, and the report displays at most 250 findings. |
|||
Revision as of 15:51, 1 November 2026
Article assessments help editors identify pages needing work and pages ready to showcase. They describe quality, not the importance of a subject. These are local assessments for Elite Dangerous Wiki.
Quality scale
| Class | Criteria |
|---|---|
| Unassessed | No local quality review recorded. Imported content and existing Main Page selections are not automatically approved. |
| Stub | An outline needing substantial expansion. |
| Start | A useful introduction with significant gaps in explanation, coverage or sources. |
| C | Main subject covered and organised, with notable gaps or sourcing problems remaining. |
| B | Substantial, coherent coverage supported by suitable sources, without major omissions or obvious outdated advice. Smaller improvements remain. |
| Good | Reviewed for accuracy, clarity, scope, sources, current game information, usable images and links. No significant unresolved maintenance issues. |
| Featured | Meets Good criteria and is an especially useful, polished example. Its introduction works for a new reader, illustrations are suitable and credited, and essential claims and gameplay advice have been checked. |
How to assess
Place {{Article assessment|class=|notes=}} at the top of the article's discussion page, preserving discussions. Leave the class empty until reviewed. Describe specific improvements in the notes.
Editors may assign Stub through B with an explanation. For Good or Featured, propose the rating on the discussion page and record a review against the criteria. A second editor or site operator should confirm the promotion. Record the review and reviewer in the discussion or edit summary. Article length, a source wiki rating or a bot's checks do not establish approval.
To downgrade a rating, explain the problems on the discussion page and change the banner. Removing Featured status removes eligibility for future daily selections. Special:PageAssessments lists structured ratings under project Elite Dangerous Wiki.
Daily Main Page selection
Selection runs at 00:05 UTC every day. The three panels select approved Featured ship, station and planet candidates. Candidates also need valid local images and short descriptions in the site's curated selection pool. Ask a site operator to add those presentation details after approval.
Until eligible candidates exist, the current curated cards remain under Selected articles. This is not a quality award. The bot will not promote pages to fill a slot. A panel may retain its previous selection when no eligible replacement exists.
Review queues
These categories contain the discussion pages carrying the banners. They are not automatic assurances that article content is correct.
Automated maintenance checks
EliteMaintenanceBot checks articles through a bounded local queue. Its maintenance report flags missing files, missing templates, reference errors and articles with no rendered inline citations. References supplied by templates count too. An article without inline citations may still contain external links or use in-game evidence; this finding asks an editor to review its sourcing.
These checks do not assign assessment classes or approve Good or Featured status. Findings are refreshed when pages are rescanned. Pages not yet checked are not certified clean, and the report displays at most 250 findings.