Couldn't load preferences. Check your connection and try again.
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.
User:CactiStaccingCrane/sandbox
From 2b2t Uncensored
More actions
Class
Criteria
Reader's experience
Editing suggestions
Example
Featured
Featured
A featured article or list exemplifies 2b2t Wiki's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all articles, it follows these criteria:
More detailed criteria
It is:
well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
well-researched: claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and
stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process.
It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; and
appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings.
Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions.
Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style.
Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information for both new, veteran and 2b2t researchers.
No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.
None
Featured
Class A
A good article or list shows it has met a core set of editorial standards, set by the Wiki's community. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all articles, it follows these criteria:
More detailed criteria
Well written:
the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
Verifiable:
all inline citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;
it contains no original research; and
it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage:
it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio, which are relevant to the topic and have suitable captions.
Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a 2b2t researcher or veteran.
A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style on Wikipedia.
The article or list is mostly complete and without major problems but requires some further work to reach Class A.
More detailed criteria
The article is suitably referenced with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited.
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for a Class A article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant".
The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although 2b2t Wiki is more than just a general reference book, the article should not assume unnecessary 2b2t experience background and 2b2t-coined terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately large event.
Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.
The article or list is substantial but is still missing important content or contains much irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup.
More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Class Stub, but it fails one or more of the criteria for Class B. It may have some gaps or missing elements; need editing for clarity, balance, or flow; or contain policy violations, such as bias or original research. It is most likely that Class C articles or lists have a reasonable encyclopedic style.
Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more.
Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use.
An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria
The article has a usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and Manual of Style compliance is non-existent. The article should satisfy fundamental content policies, such as Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Referencing is non-existent. No Class Stub article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.
Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant.
Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Class Stub article to step up to a Class C article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant.
