Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject on Football, which focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Association football related 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 WP:1.0 programme.

The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Football}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Football articles by quality and Category:Football articles by importance, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.


See also the general assessment 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 {{WikiProject Football}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Football}} 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 football 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. 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.
6. Can I request that someone else rate an article?
Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
7. 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.
8. Where can I get more comments about an article?
People at Wikipedia:Peer Review can conduct a more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there, or ask for comments on the main project discussion page.
9. 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.
10. 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!
11. 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.


Quality assessment[edit]

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

{{WikiProject Football|class=???}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class football articles)  FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class football articles)  A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class football articles)  GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class football articles) B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class football articles) C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class football articles) Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class football articles) Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class football articles)  FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class football articles) List

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

Category (for categories; adds pages to Category:Category-Class football articles) Category
Disambig (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class football articles) Disambig
Draft (for drafts; adds pages to Category:Draft-Class football articles) Draft
File (for files and timed text; adds pages to Category:File-Class football articles) File
Portal (for portal pages; adds pages to Category:Portal-Class football articles) Portal
Project (for project pages; adds pages to Category:Project-Class football articles) Project
Redirect (for redirect pages; adds pages to Category:Redirect-Class football articles) Redirect
Template (for templates and modules; adds pages to Category:Template-Class football articles) Template
NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class football articles) NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed football articles) ???

Importance assessment[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Football}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Football|importance=???}}

The following values may be used for the importance parameter to describe the relative importance of the article within the project (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Priority of topic for assessment criteria):

Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance football articles)  Top 
High (adds articles to Category:High-importance football articles)  High 
Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance football articles)  Mid 
Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance football articles)  Low 
NA (adds articles to Category:NA-importance football articles)  NA 
??? (articles for which a valid importance rating has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance football articles)  ??? 

Quality scale[edit]

Importance scale[edit]

Article importance grading scheme
Label Base criteria Football-related criteria Examples
Top Article is extremely important, even crucial, to its specific field. Reserved for articles that have achieved international notability within its subject or field. Articles strictly related to the game: rules of the game, positions, confederations, etc. Association football
Offside (football)
High Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent. Teams with international notability. Top-level leagues, awards and competitions. Top-rated world-class players and managers. AFC Ajax
Cristiano Ronaldo
UEFA Champions League
Mid Article is only notable within its particular field or subject and has achieved notability in a particular place or area. Teams with nationwide notability. Players or managers that have participated at international level or in a top-level league. Mid-level leagues. A.S. Roma
Swiss Super League
Gareth Barry
Low Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within its field of study. It may only be included to cover a specific part of a notable article. Any other player, manager or team. Football-related lists, season articles. Leek Town F.C.
Roberto Biffi
List of Arsenal F.C. players


Current status[edit]

The proportion of all articles with an assessed project banner is:

99% assessed (estimate: some more article talk pages may still need a banner)


The proportion of all articles with known importance is:

87.5% known importance (estimate: some more articles may still need importance to be assessed)


FIFA national football teams coloured by article class (25 December 2016)

Requests for assessment[edit]

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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use Wikipedia:Peer review instead.












  • PAS Giannina F.C. This article has been extensively edited in the previous weeks, and important content has been added. PAS Giannina is a top club playing on the Greek Super League 1. This club is regarded as one of the best in Greece and has very rich, "different" and interesting history, since its foundation, in 1966. PAS Giannina has participated on European games against notable teams, and has a very wide and very strong fanbase across Europe, Oceania, South America and Africa. It also has one of the best fanbases in Greece and a very atmospheric home stadium. With many world class and well known footballers having played for PAS Giannina, including Euro 2004 champion Giourkas Seitaridis, greek international Konstantinos Mavropanos, Zenit's legend Yuri Lodygin and many more. Last but not least, Ajax Amsterdam veterans recently visited Ioannina city, in order to participate on an exhibition match against the PAS Giannina veterans, a match also broadcasted by Ajax TV. After these edits, the clubs page has been renewed with tons of information, photos, categories, charts and graphics, similar to those of World class and famous clubs with great attention to detail. For these reasons, considering also the club's impact on the domestic league, on Europe, and the whole world, I believe that the importance of the page, should change from "Mid", to "High", according to the importance scale, and from class "Start", to at least class "GA", if not to class "A", according to the Quality scale, since we are talking about a complete article about a top club.
Thank you,
 Done Assessed as C-class, a good foundation to be expanded on and refined. Christiangamer7 (talk) 21:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Manchester City F.C. 3–2 Queens Park Rangers F.C. - this article was only reviewed on 5th May, but a week or so later I added a significant chunk of text (including 36 unique web citations) to close off the main gap in what needed to be added to the article. I will also go one further and add that the gap I had left was in the aftermath impact for City, which is pretty much the main purpose of the article so I'd like to think that my addition carries some weight, at least in regards to getting this article reclassified. Honestly I've never paid much attention to article assessments before so I don't have a clear image of what it should be, but having perused the classifications I'd like to think it's at least worthy of a B-class now, if not perhaps just pushing an GA rating? Of course, if anyone can suggest extra content to add I'd be more than happy to do it, but right now - aside from wording/style/formatting changes - I literally cannot think of what I can add to this article to make it any better. Falastur2 Talk 19:41, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Falastur2:,  Done After reviewing I think this would pass B-class criteria and have upped it as such. Although if you plan on getting it to GA I would advise dealing with any [better source needed] tags. Good luck! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 08:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@REDMAN 2019: I've cleaned up those Better Citation Needed warnings. What's the next step? Also, sorry to trouble you but any chance of a review of my other nomination, below? Much appreciated! Falastur2 Talk 16:44, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Falastur2, if you want to bring the article to GA status then the next step would be to nominate it at WP:GAN, instructions can be found at WP:GAI. At first glance the article looks like it would pass but do have some concerns about a couple of the sources, specifically ones sourced by and as they are considered to be generally unreliable. That would very likely be raised in a GA review but apart from that I would say go for it and good luck! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:39, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done, This was a hard one, I having compared it against other similar B-class articles, I think this would just pass and have upped it as such. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:54, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Add new requests above this line



The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available here.