Music Project	WikiProject Musicians Discussion							Music Portal
	To Do	Guidelines	1.0 Assessment	Stubs	Infobox	Navbox	Categories
	Discuss	Discuss	Discuss	Discuss	Discuss	Discuss	Discuss

Welcome to the assessment department for WikiProject Musicians. This department is responsible for assessing all of the articles in the scope of the project. We work closely with the Wikipedia:1.0 program and use assessments internally to identify excellent contributions and articles that need attention.

If you have added an article to the project or would like an article reassessed please request assessment by adding a link to the bottom of this list (please remove from list after assessment):

• Virtual band - I'm not entirely certain if I should list it here for assessment, as it doesn't talk about a specific band, but virtual bands in general. WikiProject Music doesn't do assessments, so this is probably the most relevant project for this. Had a GA assessment a long time ago; it obviously isn't that good, probably a C+ at most. --JB Adder | Talk 00:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am unsure what Wikiproject this would go under. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 03:50, 1 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Ivi Adamou – The article was assessed over a year ago by another WikiProject as B-class and I would like to know if it has improved since then. The article is (almost) entirely written by me. Dimitris  talk 14:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Jonathan Cohler - This article was assessed as Start-Class several years ago. It has had dozens of sources added, and significant editing and organization since then. I am requesting reassessment. I am the subject of the article.--TheClarinetGuy _talk 03:43, 21 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Taylan Susam –wandelw^talk 11:42, 25 July 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• XXXTentacion - This article was originally assessed as start-class though I have put a lot of work into it, added a dozen sources and also edited it largely. This is a request for reassessment as I am hoping for a C class at minimum. WolvesS (talk) 00:56, 20 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• The Phenomenauts. Hello, I'd like to request an assessment please for The Phenomenauts. This article has been largely untouched for the past 6-10 years, and I recently made a number of edits. I have added: 109 references; five new free images; 3 new non-free images; four sample audio clips (all within fair use sizes); subtitles for the audio clips; and a band member timeline chart. I have added roughly 4,000 words to the article. I have grouped it into sections, and tried to do several passes at copyediting. I have tried to make it follow the WikiProject Musicians article guidelines I would like to propose it could now be rated as A class. Feedback is quite welcome. I created a feedback section on the Talk page to help. Thanks! --Culix (talk) 05:28, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Alfredo Antonini - was last assessed in 2008 as a Start-Class and has been expanded to include sections for Discography, Filmography, Awards and External links as well as enhancements to the biographical information and links to orchestra musicians who collaborated with him. Perhaps an upgrade in the assessment could be considered. Thanks in advance for your outstanding editorial assistance and best wishes for your continued success on Wikipedia!104.207.219.150 (talk) 22:36, 20 June 2018 (UTC)PSReply[reply]
• Julius Baker - was classified as a Start-Class in June 2007 and has since been enhanced to include an infobox, External Audio links box, photographs, links to noted orchestras including the New York Philharmonic and leading mujsic conservatories such as the Julliard School - Many thanks in advance for considering an upgrade in the assessment! Ciao 104.207.219.150 (talk) 22:47, 2 July 2018 (UTC)PSReply[reply]
• Howard Hanson - was classified as a Start Class in 2009. Since that time additional sections for "Compositional Style" and "Death" have been added along with photographs and External Audio Boxes linked to performances of Hanson's music. Also included are additional reference sources and citations from new publications about Hanson's directortship at the Eastman School of Music and his compositional output. Templates requesting additional reference citations have been removed. The list of compositions has also been enhanced. Perhaps an upgrade of the rating of the article can be arranged. Many thanks in advance. 104.207.219.150 (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2019 (UTC)PSReply[reply]
• Rosé (singer) - for B-Class status. DanielleTH ^{(Say hi!)} 04:29, 30 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Henry Lewis (musician) - is classified as a stub but has been expanded with additional sections, references, a discography section and an info box. Kindly reassess when possible Thanks. 2620:65:8000:A203:85DC:6632:19E3:1D53 (talk) 17:40, 27 August 2019 (UTC)GCUReply[reply]
• Draft:Peter Holder (organist) – requesting assessment for acceptance to the article space. Thanks! LookLook36 (talk) 19:54, 21 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Avicii - Assessed C-class in December 2014, the content of the article has changed significantly since then.Isi96 (talk) 13:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Sidor Belarsky - Kindly reassess this biography of an internationally recognized opera soloist and educator from Ukraine -- The article has been wikified with additional content and links to archives and recordings within a discography. I have tentatively upgraded it from Stub status to Start status but it might need an additional upgrade by a more experienced editor. Many thanks.160.72.80.178 (talk) 19:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)NHPLReply[reply]
• Guy Lombardo - Currently assessed as a Start (in 200)7 and has since also been expanded to include content in a new Performances section, links to online performances and photographs and rewording of content to avoid copyright restrictions. The article may qualify as at least a B class and has been nominated for GA. Thanks! 160.72.81.86 (talk) 17:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)GCLReply[reply]

If you are looking for in-depth comments you can request peer review.

Quality assessments

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the ((WikiProject Biography)) project banner on its talk page:

The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article (see Wikipedia:Content assessment for assessment criteria):

FA (for featured articles only; adds articles to Category:FA-Class biography (musicians) articles)		FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class biography (musicians) articles)		A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class biography (musicians) articles)		GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class biography (musicians) articles)		B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class biography (musicians) articles)		C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class biography (musicians) articles)		Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class biography (musicians) articles)		Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class biography (musicians) articles)		FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class biography (musicians) articles)		List

For non-standard grades and non-mainspace content, the following values may be used for the class parameter:

Quality scale

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. 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: 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; neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; 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 compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing. 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; appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and 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. 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. 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]	Cleopatra (as of June 2018)
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: Prose. It features professional standards of writing. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria. Comprehensiveness. (a) It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items. (b) statements are sourced where they appear, and they provide inline citations if they contain any of the four kinds of material absolutely required to have citations. (c) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; does not violate the content-forking guideline, does not largely duplicate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages. (a) Visual appeal. It makes suitable use of text layout, formatting, tables, and colour; and a minimal proportion of items are redlinked. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions. Non-free images and other media satisfy the criteria for the inclusion of non-free content and are labeled accordingly. 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 dates predicted for apocalyptic events (as of May 2018)
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.	Battle of Nam River (as of June 2014)
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: 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 with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; 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); it contains no original research; and it contains no copyright violations or 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: media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and 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.	Discovery of the neutron (as of April 2019)
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 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. 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. 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 Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously. 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. 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.	Psychology (as of January 2024)
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.	Wing (as of June 2018)
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.	Ball (as of September 2014)
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.	Lineage (anthropology) (as of December 2014)
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 literary movements

Importance scale

Biography (musicians) articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA	16	36	43	58		20	173
FL				5			5
GA	18	52	160	325		175	730
B	40	218	817	1,203		1,656	3,934
C	18	206	1,052	6,434	1	7,222	14,933
Start	7	154	1,767	30,061	3	40,473	72,465
Stub		17	315	21,600	4	36,155	58,091
List	3	2	8	171		176	360
Category			4	6	8,993		9,003
Disambig				3	23		26
File					172		172
Project					27		27
Redirect	1	3	31	617	2,918		3,570
Template				16	910		926
NA					1		1
Other			1	48	1,440		1,489
Assessed	103	688	4,198	60,547	14,492	85,877	165,905
Unassessed			2	233		3,464	3,699
Total	103	688	4,200	60,780	14,492	89,341	169,604
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 783,845			Ω = 5.21

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

Unexpected changes, such as downgrading an article, or raising it more than two assessment classes at once, are shown in bold.

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography (musicians) articles by quality log

There is a list of Popular pages, ordered by number of views, a bot-generated list of pageviews, useful for focused cleanup of frequently viewed articles.

The logs in this section are generated automatically (on a daily basis); please don't add entries to them by hand.

((Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography (musicians) articles by quality))

• Version 1.0 Editorial Team
• Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Work via Wikiprojects
• Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment