Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome to the assessment department of the Doctor Who WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Doctor Who articles. Much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the article ratings are also used within the project itself to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.
| Doctor Who articles by quality and importance | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Quality | Importance | ||||||
| Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Total | ||
| 1 | 5 | 2 | 8 | ||||
| 5 | 2 | 7 | |||||
| 1 | 36 | 156 | 22 | 215 | |||
| B | 7 | 29 | 59 | 21 | 116 | ||
| C | 6 | 53 | 194 | 77 | 330 | ||
| Start | 10 | 59 | 248 | 317 | |||
| Stub | 3 | 201 | 204 | ||||
| List | 3 | 9 | 37 | 1 | 50 | ||
| Category | 298 | 298 | |||||
| Disambig | 10 | 10 | |||||
| File | 791 | 791 | |||||
| Portal | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Project | 48 | 48 | |||||
| Redirect | 12 | 86 | 562 | 1,130 | 1,790 | ||
| Template | 78 | 78 | |||||
| Other | 17 | 17 | |||||
| Assessed | 14 | 149 | 571 | 1,172 | 2,374 | 4,280 | |
| Total | 14 | 149 | 571 | 1,172 | 2,374 | 4,280 | |
| WikiWork factors (?) | ω = 4,907 | Ω = 4.12 | |||||
The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Doctor Who}} talk page project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Doctor Who articles by quality and Category:Doctor Who articles by importance, which serve as the sources for an automatically generated worklist.
A committee is being formed to help with the assessment of Doctor Who related articles.
|
Instructions
An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{WikiProject Doctor Who}} project banner:
{{WikiProject Doctor Who|class=|importance=|other variable=}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter:
| Class | Category | Importance | Pages | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FA | FA-Class Doctor Who articles | 8 | ||
| FL | FL-Class Doctor Who articles | 7 | ||
| GA | GA-Class Doctor Who articles | 215 | ||
| B | B-Class Doctor Who articles | 116 | ||
| C | C-Class Doctor Who articles | 330 | ||
| Start | Start-Class Doctor Who articles | 317 | ||
| List | List-Class Doctor Who articles | 50 | ||
| Stub | Stub-Class Doctor Who articles | 204 | Make sure {{DoctorWho-stub}} is on the article page. (52 tagged) | |
| Disambig | Disambig-Class Doctor Who pages | 10 | ||
| Redirect | Redirect-Class Doctor Who pages | 1,790 | ||
| Category | Category-Class Doctor Who pages | 298 | ||
| File | File-Class Doctor Who pages | 791 | This includes all Doctor Who images. | |
| Portal | Portal-Class Doctor Who pages | 1 | ||
| Template | Template-Class Doctor Who pages | 78 | ||
| Project | Project-Class Doctor Who pages | 48 | ||
| NA | NA-Class Doctor Who pages | 40 | ||
| none | Unassessed Doctor Who articles | 0 | Articles for which a valid class is not provided. | |
| Total Doctor Who articles | 1,247 | |||
Classes should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
The following values may be used for the importance parameter:
- Top (adds articles to Top-importance Doctor Who articles)
- High (adds articles to High-importance Doctor Who articles)
- Mid (adds articles to Mid-importance Doctor Who articles)
- Low (adds articles to Low-importance Doctor Who articles)
Articles for which a valid importance is not provided are listed in Category:Unknown-importance Doctor Who articles. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.
Quality scale
| Class | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured article criteria:
A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia'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 Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.
|
Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | "The Stolen Earth" (as of Jan 2026) |
|
| The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates. More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
|
Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. | List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present)|List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present) (as of Jan 2026) |
|
| The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria
A good article is:
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. | Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. | Genesis of the Daleks (as of Jan 2026) |
|
| B | The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria
|
Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. | 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 and related style guidelines. | Verity Lambert (as of Jan 2026) |
| C | The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains 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 Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
|
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. | Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems. | "Before the Flood" (as of Jan 2026) |
| Start | 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 meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
|
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. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon. | "Doctor in Distress" (as of Jan 2026) |
| Stub | A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. | 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 Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. | Lachele Carl (as of Jan 2026) |
| List | Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area. | There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader. | Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized. | List of Doctor Who cast members (as of Jan 2026) |
| Category | Any category falls under this class. | Categories are mainly used to group together articles within a particular subject area. | Large categories may need to be split into one or more subcategories. Be wary of articles that have been miscategorized. | Doctor Who Doctors |
| Disambig | Any disambiguation page falls under this class. | The page serves to distinguish multiple articles that share the same (or similar) title. | Additions should be made as new articles of that name are created. Pay close attention to the proper naming of such pages, as they often do not need "(disambiguation)" appended to the title. | New New York |
| Portal | Any page in the portal namespace falls under this class. | Portals are intended to serve as "main pages" for specific topics. | Editor involvement is essential to ensure that portals are kept up to date. | Portal:Doctor Who |
| Project | All WikiProject-related pages fall under this class. | Project pages are intended to aid editors in article development. | Develop these pages into collaborative resources that are useful for improving articles within the project. | WikiProject Doctor Who |
| Template | Any template falls under this class. The most common types of templates include infoboxes and navboxes. | Different types of templates serve different purposes. Infoboxes provide easy access to key pieces of information about the subject. Navboxes are for the purpose of grouping together related subjects into an easily accessible format, to assist the user in navigating between articles. | Infoboxes are typically placed at the upper right of an article, while navboxes normally go across the very bottom of a page. Beware of too many different templates, as well as templates that give either too little, too much, or too specialized information. | Dalek stories |
| NA | Any non-article page that fits no other classification. | The page contains no article content. | Look out for misclassified articles. Currently, many NA-class articles may need to be re-classified. | The WikiDoctor |
Importance scale
| Importance | Criteria | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Top | Articles that have indelibly associated with Doctor Who on an international scale, e.g. TARDIS and Dalek. The television series and their lead characters should also be included in this category. | Dalek |
| High | Multi-serial and multi-episode articles including episode lists; The Doctors by regeneration articles; Companions from Doctor Who; regular characters from the spin-off television series. | Amy Pond |
| Mid | Serials and episodes; Recurring characters; executive producers; Doctor actors; Elisabeth Sladen; John Barrowman; John Leeson. | Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart |
| Low | Actors and other personnel (there are two other projects that we share those with: WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers and WikiProject Biography) and any articles which do not qualify for the above. | Bernard Cribbins |
Assessment committee
Do you wish to help in assessing articles and deciding what articles should have which quality or importance? Sign up below or start assessing.
Lady Aleena (talk · contribs)- Amxitsa (talk · contribs)
- Sceptre (talk · contribs)
- Wolf of Fenric (talk · contribs)
- Zythe (talk · contribs)
- Wiggstar69 (talk · contribs)
- Weebiloobil (talk · contribs)
- SoWhy (talk · contribs)
- Thelb4 (talk · contribs)
- Botswana41 (talk · contribs)
- OlifanofmrTennant (talk · contribs)