Roblox Wiki:WikiOp Article Quality/Rubric

WikiOp Article Quality aims to increase the overall quality of articles on the Roblox Wiki. To accomplish this, we aim to evaluate all article pages within our scope and determine where each article stands amongst others.

Any article in our scope can be evaluated against this grading rubric. Any member registered to this WikiOp (see /Members § Joining this WikiOp) is allowed and encouraged to perform an article evaluation.

Scope of articles[]

All standard prose articles in our content namespaces (excluding Tutorial articles) older than 24 hours are eligible to be evaluated based on this grading rubric. (At this time, non-prose articles, especially lists, are not directly covered by this WikiOp.)

Pages that do not meet Start-Class criteria, per the rubric below, are typically unfit to reside in our content namespaces and therefore are not typically covered by this WikiOp. These pages are considered drafts (many of which are erroneously marked as stubs) and may be marked with the {{draft}} template and then moved to the original author's userspace.

On occasions where a draft or stub is expected to have marginal public interest & rapid improvement, the page may be marked with the {{stub}} template and may be graded to help guide improvements for interested editors.

When to grade articles[]

While any article covered in our WikiOp's scope may be evaluated, a new evaluation of an article may not always be necessary or desired.

A covered articleSee § Scope of articles for details. should be evaluated if:

the article is not the focus of recent edits (i.e. no other edits to target article within the last 24 hours) AND
the article was last evaluated 1+ month(s) ago OR has never been evaluated,

AND at least one of the following:

significant revisions were made to the article since last evaluation OR
the previous evaluation was incomplete or did not follow the grading instructions OR
upon cases of editor request.

However, there are generally no repercussions for evaluating an article (in good faith) if you are a member of this WikiOp. If you think an article truly needs a re-evaluation, be bold and go for it!

Grading rubric[]

For questions regarding this rubric, contact a member of the WikiOp Article Quality QA team or ask on Roblox Wiki talk:WikiOp Article Quality/Rubric.

Article quality grading rubric (v1.0)
Class	Criteria
Articles that do not meet Start Class guidelines are not covered in the scope of this WikiOp and are considered to be in a draft state or stub state.
Start 🏁	These articles just meet the bare minimum requirements for being a valid wiki article. A Start-Class article provides enough information to introduce the subject, but not enough for more than an elementary understanding of the subject. Article must meet baseline article standards set in Project:Policies and guidelines/Page content#MoS, namely: have an infobox that is fully filled, if an applicable infobox exists; have a decent amount of information on the subject, but otherwise incomplete; include more than just 1-2 sentences; include a relevant image or graphic.
C 🟥	These articles are more developed than a bare Start-Class stub, but are lacking many elements present in a standard wiki article. Meets all Start-Class criteria AND meets some of the following: C1 / OVERVIEW. Contains a sufficient lead section/summary/overview. C2 / COVERAGE. Has multiple, relevant article sections/headings. C3 / STRUCTURED. Follows article structure guidelines in RW:MOS#Article structure. C4 / NEUTRAL. Article is written in a neutral point of view (e.g. is not overtly promotional nor negative), per Roblox Wiki:Policies and guidelines/Page content#Neutral POV.
B 🟨	Meets all C-Class criteria AND meets some of the following: B1 / CITED. Contains appropriate citations. B2 / COMPREHENSIVE. No obvious omissions or inaccuracies. B3 / READABLE. Devoid of glaring grammatical issues and written in an encyclopedic tone. B4 / FOCUSED. Does not dwell on excessive or trivial detail, nor devolve into trailing lists. (See RW:NOT's "Not for excessive, in-depth details on subjects" for additional info.)
Good ✅	Meets or exceeds all B-Class criteria. These articles must be confirmed by AQ QA before official designation as Good-Class.
A	This article class is not evaluated by WikiOp Article Quality. Good-Class articles are referred to the article's categorical WikiOp (e.g. Project:WikiOp Experiences) for consideration as A-Class (or above) by means of nomination.

Grading instructions[]

The following generic grading instructions may be used on articles within this WikiOp's scope:

Creating an evaluation[]

An evaluation helps create helpful documentation for other editors and article authors by highlighting errors that can be corrected to improve the article.

To create an evaluation...

Go to an article's associated talk page.
- This can be done by selecting the TALK button in the tray on the top right of any content article.
Start a new edit on the talk page.
Locate the existing {{AQs}} near the top of the talk page – OR – if not already present, add {{AQs}} at the very top.
Copy & complete the example evaluation worksheet in a text editor.
(And while you complete the worksheet, keep some things in mind.)
Criteria met
Simply answer ` y ` or ` yes ` for any criterion that is met per the grading rubric. You may also affix any additional comments, if desired.
Examples:
```
| C1 = y
```
```
| B1 = yes, but citations are [[wikipedia:link rot|rotted]]
```
Criteria not met
For any criterion not met, provide a brief written explanation for why the article fails to meet necessary requirements.
Example:
```
| C2 = Article only contains a lead section or summary without any other sections.
```
Inside {{AQs}}, for the first parameter, insert your completed {{AQ evaluation}} worksheet on a new line above all other prior evaluations (if any).
- The AQs block should look similar to the following:
  {{AQs| < Your new {{AQ evaluation}} > < Older evaluation > ... < Oldest evaluation > }}
Submit your edit to the talk page.
Important! Follow steps in the next section to add or update an {{AQI}}.

Keep in mind while grading...[]

Article grading can be highly subjective. Although two assessors may conclude on the same grade class to issue an article, they would never be able to grade the same article in the same exact way with the same exact comments.

There is no singular right-way to grade, so don't be afraid to give an article a grade and don't be afraid to end up changing an article's grade class if it is in need of change.

Nonetheless, other assessors may offer up words of advice on how to improve your own grading, but please take this in stride! We are ultimately all participants of this WikiOp in order to offer each other comments & advice on improving articles – all for the betterment of the wiki as a whole.

Adding or updating an AQI[]

Once a new evaluation is created, it is critical to add or update the AQI (otherwise known as the Article Quality Indicator) on the subject article itself. The AQI provides a clear visual quality indicator on the top of an article and automatically categorizes the article as its evaluated quality class.

Updating an AQI can be as quick & simple as 3-clicks! To quickly update an AQI shortly after making a new evaluation...

Locate your new evaluation on the article's talk page.
Click on "Quick AQI". This will take you to a pre-populated Special:APISandbox page.
NOTE: You do not need to make any other changes on this page, but it is typically a good idea to check the "action=edit" section (in the left pane) to ensure nothing is awry.
On the sandbox page, click on "Submit Request". You will see an error validation message stating that "some fields are invalid"– this is expected.
Click on "Correct Token & Resubmit".
The request should return as successful – you're all done!

You may also use the above process to add an AQI to an article that is currently without one. Go through the above steps and then later edit the article to fine tune the AQI's location to be below the article text but above all navboxes.