WikiProject
College Basketball
Overview
Project page talk
Participants talk
Project category talk
Departments
Assessment (log) talk
Article alerts talk
Cleanup listing
Unassessed articles (1391)
Unknown importance (9937)
Featured articles (21)
Featured lists (15)
Good articles (254)
Total WPCBB articles (56442)
Resources and Guides
Master team table talk
Popular pages talk
Research sources talk
Templates talk
Yearbook references talk
Yearly team pages format talk
Tools
Active editors talk
CBB Welcome Template talk
Project banner talk
Project Userbox talk
Important Articles
2023–24 NCAA men's
DI season 		talk
2023–24 men's rankings talk
2024 men's DI tournament talk
2023–24 NCAA women's
DI season 		talk
2023–24 women's rankings talk
2024 women's DI tournament talk
view • talk • edit • changes
College basketball articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 3 3 4 11 21
FL 3 6 6 15
GA 1 25 76 150 2 254
B 18 54 170 231 16 489
C 22 163 442 1,160 317 2,104
Start 102 339 3,267 9,850 3,293 16,851
Stub 4 86 1,134 6,491 1 4,847 12,563
List 96 183 126 654 109 1,168
Category 10,288 10,288
Disambig 58 58
File 5,417 5,417
Project 28 28
Redirect 1 8 37 1,112 1,158
Template 1 4,587 4,588
Other 43 43
Assessed 246 857 5,233 18,591 21,534 8,584 55,045
Unassessed 2 36 1,353 1,391
Total 248 857 5,233 18,627 21,534 9,937 56,436
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 170,013 Ω = 5.27

Welcome to the assessment department of the College Basketball WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's college basketball articles.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the ((WikiProject College basketball)) project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:College basketball articles by quality and Category:College basketball articles by importance, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.





Frequently asked questions[edit]

How do I add an article to the College basketball WikiProject?
Just add ((WikiProject College basketball)) to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
How can I get my article rated?
Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
Who can assess articles?
Any member of the College Basketball WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.
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.
Where can I get more comments about my article?
This does not exist for this project yet. Perhaps you could join the project and create a peer review system?
What if I don't agree with a quality 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.
What if I don't agree with an importance rating?
If you believe an item is mis-classed or its class has since changed, please list it in the Requesting an assessment with your reasons. Please see the importance scale below and make sure your claims follow the criteria listed.
Aren't the ratings subjective?
Yes, they are (see, in particular, the disclaimers on the importance scale), 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!
How can I keep track of changes in article ratings?
A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the monthly statistics may be more accessible.
Can I review my own article?
You may not rate your own articles. New articles should be added to the peer review section of assessment. Large changes to articles that may change the quality should be added to the Requesting an assessment section. Articles that may need a change in Importance status should be listed in the Importance review section.

If you have any other questions not listed here, please feel free to ask them on the discussion page for this department, or to contact the project coordinators directly.

Current status[edit]

82.4% of WP:CBBALL articles assessed by importance

   


(9937 remaining)

97.5% of WP:CBBALL articles have been assessed by class

   


(1391 remaining)

0.4% of WP:CBBALL articles assessed as Top Importance

   


(248 of 56442)

0.5% of WP:CBBALL articles are rated GA-Class

   


(254 of 56442)

1.5% of WP:CBBALL articles assessed as High Importance

   


(857 of 56442)

0.9% of WP:CBBALL articles are rated B-Class

   


(489 of 56442)

9.3% of WP:CBBALL articles assessed as Mid Importance

   


(5233 of 56442)

3.7% of WP:CBBALL articles are rated C-Class

   


(2104 of 56442)

33% of WP:CBBALL articles assessed as Low Importance

   


(18628 of 56442)

29.9% of WP:CBBALL articles are rated Start-Class

   


(16851 of 56442)

38.2% of WP:CBBALL articles assessed as N/A Importance

   


(21535 of 56442)

22.3% of WP:CBBALL articles are rated Stub-Class

   


(12562 of 56442)

Instructions[edit]

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the ((WikiProject College basketball)) project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

((WikiProject College basketball| class=??? | importance=???)) (These are currently the only options)

While assessing articles, please rate the class and importance with a capital letter. This will insure uniformity on the template.

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed college basketball articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

Quality scale

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
 FA 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.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. 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; and
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.
 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.[under discussion] Tim Duncan
 FL 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:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.
 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. List of NCAA Division I men's basketball champions
 A The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history).
 Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help. N/A
 GA 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:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 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. 2013–14 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team
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
  1. 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. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as ((cite web)) is optional.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
  3. 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.
  4. 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 Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. 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.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
 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. Auburn Tigers men's basketball
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. LaMarcus Aldridge
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:
  • A useful picture or graphic
  • Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
 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. 2018–19 Buffalo Bulls men's basketball team
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. 2018–19 Southern Conference men's basketball season
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 Atlantic Coast Conference men's basketball regular season champions
Future A topic about which details are subject to change often.
More detailed criteria
The article covers a future topic of which no broadcast version exists so far and all information is subject to change when new information arises from reliable sources. With multiple reliable sources, there might be information that contradicts other information in the same or other articles. Not all future categories will be rated with "Future" and may be rated like normal.
 Amount of meaningful content varies over time as the projected event draws near. Material added might be speculation and should be carefully sourced. 2021 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Tournament
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. Category:WikiProject College basketball articles
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. Iona Gaels basketball
File Any page in the file namespace falls under this class. The page contains an image, a sound clip or other media-related content. Make sure that the file is properly licensed and credited. File:2008 NCAA Men's Final Four logo.png
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:College basketball
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. Wikipedia:WikiProject College Basketball
Redirect Any redirect falls under this class. The page redirects to another article with a similar name, related topic or that has been merged with the original article at this location. Editor involvement is essential to ensure that articles are not mis-classified as redirects, and that redirects are not mis-classified as articles. 1948–49 The Citadel Bulldogs basketball team
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. Template:2015–16 NCAA Division I men's basketball conference season navbox
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. N/A

Importance scale

The criteria used for rating article importance are not meant to be an absolute or canonical view of how significant the topic is. Rather, they attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Thus, subjects with greater popular notability may be rated higher than topics which are arguably more "important" but which are of interest primarily to students or fans of college basketball. Furthermore, there are always exceptions to every rule so editors should use their best judgment rather than rigorously following the guidelines.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country, state or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.

Requesting an assessment

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. New articles do not need to be listed here unless they have gone unrated for more than 2 weeks. Please be sure to add new articles to the assessment table.

  1. Add articles here!

Importance review section

If you believe an item is incorrectly classified in importance or its importance has changed, please feel free to list it below along with your justification.



Peer Review[edit]

Grading scheme

The following grading scheme and classification system follow the criteria established by Version 1.0 Editorial Team.

Sample Table

This table can be copied as is and used as a basis for an entire new type, but for most cases, just copy a row in a table already there to add your new article assessment, and refer to this table to understand the meaning of the columns.

Article Assessed Quality Importance Pending tasks Assessed by
Put a link to the article here assessment date
Use ~~~~~ 		Use the color scheme codes below for background color, and quality assessment title Use the color scheme codes below for background color, and importance assessment title Explain further why you give this quality and importance rating, highlight additional areas of concern Put your userid here
Use ~~~

If you don't know how to add or assess an article at these lists, please post at the project talk page instead. Your collaboration will be added here shortly.

Codes and meanings[edit]

Article progress grading scheme
Status Cell Color
Quality
Needs opinion #ffffff
Not started #888888
Stub #ff5555
Start class #ffa07a
B-Class #ffee00
GA-Class #66ff66
A-Class #90ee90
FA-Class #3399ff
Importance
Top #ff00ff
High #ff88ff
Mid #ffccff
Low #ffeeff

Players[edit]

Article Assessed Quality Importance Pending tasks Assessed by

Coaches[edit]

Article Assessed Quality Importance Pending tasks Assessed by

Schools[edit]

Article Assessed Quality Importance Pending tasks Assessed by

General Basketball & Miscellanious[edit]

Article Assessed Quality Importance Pending tasks Assessed by

Statistics[edit]

Raw counts[edit]

This is too new to have stats. Created July 5, 2006.

Monthly changes[edit]

This is too new to have stats. Created July 5, 2006.

Log[edit]

Click here for the complete log.

Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/College_basketball_articles_by_quality_log
Category