Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Assessment
Main page  Discussion  Content  Assessment  Participants  Resources 
Mathematics articles by quality and importance  

Quality  Importance  
Top  High  Mid  Low  NA  ???  Total  
FA  9  3  10  2  24  
FL  2  1  3  
FM  62  62  
GA  18  11  53  68  2  152  
B  166  261  508  422  42  1,399  
C  50  570  835  1,230  425  3,110  
Start  45  2,391  6,250  1  1,674  10,361  
Stub  100  5,421  6  957  6,484  
List  5  13  75  217  8  54  372 
Draft  1  130  1  132  
Category  1,176  1,176  
Disambig  1  28  29  
File  15  15  
Portal  2  2  
Project  23  23  
Redirect  1  1  2  339  343  
Template  842  842  
Assessed  248  904  3,975  13,615  2,632  3,155  24,529 
Unassessed  495  495  
Total  248  904  3,975  13,615  2,632  3,650  25,024 
WikiWork factors (?)  ω = 107,667  Ω = 5.00 
What is this all about? The aim of this subproject is to assess mathematics articles for their quality and importance (or priority), and to classify them broadly by field. These ratings are intended to help the project track its progress, identify weak spots in its coverage, and highlight articles which could become Good Articles or Featured articles. They also link with the Wikipedia 1.0 project to produce a CDROM with the best of Wikipedia, and similar ratings are used by over 100 WikiProjects.
The table summarizes information about the articles that have been assigned ratings.
How to assess articles[edit]
Any article can be assessed for its mathematical content and anybody can assess an article simply by adding the {{maths rating}}
tag to the article's talk page and filling in the class and importance and parameters (see below). These ratings can be modified by all editors, with disputes discussed on the article's talk page. The most important component of this assessment is the quality of the article, given by the class parameter. If this parameter is omitted, the {{maths rating}}
tag will place the article in the unassessed category, which is a signal for other editors to grade its quality.
The quality criteria for articles in this project follow the WP 1.0 assessment. A log of new ratings and changes can be found at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Mathematics articles by quality log.
The {{maths rating}} template[edit]
To classify an article, place the template {{maths rating}} on the article's talk page. Anyone can add a maths rating or change an existing rating. The template can be used to assess the importance (or priority) and quality (or class grading) of the article using the importance and class parameters respectively. Specifying these parameters will place the article in the appropriate subcategory of Category:Mathematics articles by priority and Category:Mathematics articles by quality. There is also a field parameter to define the subject area of the article.
For full details please visit Template:Maths rating/doc.
Assessment summary and list of fields[edit]
Summary of {{maths rating}} importance, and class parameters  

Importance: the importance (or priority) of the article/subject, regardless of its quality.  Class: the current quality of the article.  
Top  Extremely important, even crucial, to its field, and very significant beyond it  FA  This is a featured article. 
High  Contributes a substantial depth of knowledge with significant impact in other fields  A  Essentially complete, well written and referenced; possible featured article candidate. 
Mid  Adds important further details within its field, with some impact beyond it  GA  This is a good article. 
Low  Contributes more specific or less significant details, or is mainly of specialist interest  B  A decent article, but it needs further editing to extend coverage or accessibility 
C  Some cleanup or expansion needed.  
Start  Significant cleanup or expansion needed.  
Stub  Article has very little content, or is a stub. 
Quality grading scheme[edit]
A more extensive description of the quality grading criteria is given in the table below. This is based on the WP 1.0 Assessment.
Quality  Criteria  Reader's experience  Examples 

Editor's experience  
FA{{FAClass}}

Reserved exclusively for articles that have received featured article status after peer review, and meet the current criteria for featured articles.  Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information.  Monty Hall problem (Oct 25, 2008) Leonhard Euler (Mar 2, 2007) 
No further editing is necessary unless new published information has come to light; but further improvements to the text are often possible.  
A{{AClass}}

Provides a wellwritten, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in "How to write a great article". It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a wellwritten introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, from textbooks or peerreviewed papers, rather than websites. Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status; corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard.  Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A nonmathematician would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points.  Golden ratio (Oct 25, 2008) Albert Einstein (Oct 25, 2008) 
Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subjectmatter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peerreview would be helpful at this stage.  
GA{{GAClass}}

This class is for articles of at least B quality which have also passed through the good article nomination process and meet the good article standards. The article has all the positive elements of a Bclass article, and may be regarded as a complete article. It is broad in its coverage, while staying focused on the topic; it is factually accurate, verifiable and neutral; and it is well presented, both in terms of grammar, and adherence to the main points in the Manual of Style. The article is wellreferenced, and is illustrated, where appropriate, by an image or images which comply with copyright guidelines. Among mathematics articles these are some of the best. Note that the good article designation is not a requirement for AClass. AClass articles which meet good article standards should be considered for featured article status.  Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject which attempts to be as accessible as possible, with a minimum of jargon. No obvious problems, gaps, excessive information. Has a more polished presentation, more illustrations (as appropriate), more detailed history, and more references that typical Bclass.  Homotopy groups of spheres (Oct 25, 2008) Ordinal number (Mar 2, 2007) 
Further editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience.  
B{{BClass}}

The article has several of the elements described in "start", and most of the material needed for a complete article; all major aspects of the subject are at least mentioned. Nonetheless, it has significant gaps or missing elements or references, needs substantial editing for English language usage and/or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as some minor neutral point of view (NPOV) or no original research (NOR) concerns. With neutral point of view, a wellwritten Bclass may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard.  Useful to most, but not all, readers. An interested reader flipping through the article may feel that they generally understood the topic. However, it may not be as accessible as it could be, or it may be inadequate for a serious student or researcher trying to use the material, who might have trouble or risk error using the article in derivative work.  Set (Mar 2, 2007) Limit (mathematics) (Mar 2, 2007) Vector space (Mar 2, 2007) 
Some editing is still needed, including filling in some gaps or correcting policy errors. Articles for which cleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. May be improved by input from experts to assess where coverage is still missing, and also by illustrations, historical background and further references. Consider peer review or nominating for good article status. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time.  
C{{CClass}}

The majority of the material needed of a complete article is included, but there are significant areas that are not yet covered. The article may be poorly organized or still include questionable or irrelevant material. Good general references have been provided, but citations for some aspects or individual facts may still be missing or unclear. The text is at least readable enough for someone to understand the material, though there may be serious conflicts with Manual of Style guidelines. Diagrams essential for understanding the text are included.  Useful to many readers. A reader would feel they generally understood the basics of the topic, but there are noticeable gaps in the material presented. There may be questionable or irrelevant material or the material may not be organized in a way that makes the subject easy to understand. Will be of little or no use to a serious student or researcher.  Right Angle (Mar 23, 2010) Ratio (Feb 23, 2010) 
Sections covering significant aspects of the subject may still need to be added. Existing material may be poorly organized, so gathering material into meaningful sections or ordering the material to make an effective presentation may be necessary.  
Start{{StartClass}}

The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element such as a standard infobox. For example an article on groups might cover the theory well, but be weak on history and motivation. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:

Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded.  Hypergraph (Mar 2, 2007) Esther Szekeres (Mar 2, 2007) Theorem (Mar 2, 2007) 
Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an article cleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage.  
Stub{{StubClass}}

The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible.  Possibly useful to a mathematician who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a nonmathematician, or a reader only passingly familiar with the term. Ideally it is at least a brief, informed definition.  Selig Brodetsky (Mar 2, 2007) Parallel curve (Mar 2, 2007) Algebraic number theory (Mar 2, 2007) 
Any editing or additional material can be helpful.  
Label  Criteria  Reader's experience  Examples 
Editor's experience 
Priority scale[edit]
Assessing the priority or importance level of mathematics articles is not straightforward. It is discussed in more detail here. The following table adds a little more detail about priority levels for mathematics articles.
Priority  Importance within field  Impact  Need for encyclopedia  Examples 

Top  Article/subject is extremely important, even crucial, to its field  Widespread and very significant  An absolute "musthave" for any reasonable mathematical encyclopedia  Trigonometric function, Manifold, Special relativity 
High  Article/subject contributes a substantial depth of knowledge  Significant impact in other fields  Very much needed, even vital  3manifold, Linear combination, Poisson distribution 
Mid  Article/subject adds important further details within its field  Some impact beyond field  Adds further depth, but not vital to encyclopedia  Homotopy groups of spheres, Second order logic, Generalized hypergeometric function 
Low  Article/subject contributes more specific or less significant details  Mainly of specialist interest  Not at all essential, or can be covered adequately by other articles  Area of a disk, Abel transform, Companion matrix 
(None)  Article/subject may be peripheral  May be too highly specialized  May not be relevant or may be too trivial in content to be needed  Comment: such articles are not relevant enough to the mathematics project to need a maths rating. 
Articles to include[edit]
The prioritization of mathematics articles has been motivated by: articles highlighted in Mathematics; those linked from Portal:Mathematics#Topics in Mathematics; a selection of the most linkedto maths articles (see talk page); Wikipedia:Vital_articles#Mathematics; and anything else an editors felt should be included as important.
The lists of articles have split into subpages organised by mathematical field, and are linked via the navigation box at the top and bottom of this page. (The exceptions are the "Core" articles, detailed below.) The lists are not meant to be exhaustive or definitive and editors are encouraged to make additions.
Core Articles[edit]
See Mathematics Core Articles.
See also[edit]
 Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index discussion on automatic indexing.
 Wikipedia:Version 0.5 first step in the project, nominations now closed, 11 mathematics articles, 7 mathematicians
 Wikipedia:Featured articles  13 articles , 2 on review
 Wikipedia:Good articles
 Wikipedia:Vital_articles#Mathematics
 Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Science and academia