Wikipedia:WikiProject Former countries/Assessment - Wikipedia

Welcome to the Assessment Department of the Former Countries WikiProject!

This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's articles on now-defunct nations. While 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.

The ratings are done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WPFC}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Former country articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

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 Former countries 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.

What if I don't agree with a 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.

Aren't the ratings subjective?

Yes, they are, 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!

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

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Banner Shell}}. Articles that have the {{WPFC}} project banner on their talk page will be added to the appropriate categories by quality.

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

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

After assessing an article's quality, comments on the assessment can be added to the article's talk page.

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. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the peer review department instead. (please note that this department is currently undergoing renovations, so please post your peer review requests here, but make sure to note that you wish for a peer review, not just a regular review)

1. Duchy of Florence I wrote a new artilce. (Jack1755 (talk) 00:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)) very good work on yet another article! I originally assessed it as Start-Class as I found some grammatical errors. However, as I have already fixed the grammatical erros in the article, I re-assessed it as B-Class.[reply]
2. Republic of Florence I wrote another new artilce. (Jack1755 (talk) 00:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)) Very good work on another article! I originally assessed it as Start-Class because I found some grammatical errors. However, as I have already fixed the grammatical errors in the article, it has been re-assessed as B-Class. Laurinavicius (talk) 21:45, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
3. Grand Duchy of Tuscany I completely over-hauled the article-user:Jack1755 Very good work on greatly expanding the article and adding and fully completing the infobox! However, I only assessed it as Start-Class as I found some grammatical errors within the text of the article. However, once these errors are corrected, then the article will be re-assessed as B-Class. I'll get to work on fixing these mistakes up as soon as possible. Laurinavicius (talk) 21:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC) Re-assessed as B-Class as all of the aforementioned grammatical errors have been fixed. Laurinavicius (talk) 20:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
4. Kingdom of Italy (1861-1946) - re-assessed from Stub to B-class. Nominated for GA assessment - 52 Pickup 21:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Republic of Entre Ríos Just a stub I wrote, not much to it as I'm pretty unfamiliar with it. Hopefully someone else can expand it. faithless (^speak) 01:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC) rated to start[reply]
6. Moldavia - an old article I just put on a semi-standard form for old states. Madalinfocsa (talk) 10:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7. Request assessments for Batavian Republic and Vlieter Incident.--Ereunetes (talk) 00:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC) Both articles are very well done I really don't like the length of the Batavian Republic, but that's the only problem I have with it. I suggest that you submit both articles for GA review if you agree with me that they are of GA quality. Laurinavicius (talk) 16:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
8. Karl Friedrich von dem Knesebeck - an article on a Prussian field marshal that I started some time ago. FWTTVK (talk) 12:54, 22 April 2008 (UTC) The article is good but, as the assessment on the discussion page states, the article needs to be suitably referenced and cited, while at the present time it has no citations at all. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
9. Request assessment for Economic History of the Netherlands (1500 - 1815), First Stadtholderless Period and Financial history of the Dutch Republic--Ereunetes (talk) 00:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
10. Sparta The article is currently a B-Class article for it needs "more sources for chronological/historical verification", as quoted from the banner on the article's discussion page. I must also state that I agree with the banner. Laurinavicius (talk) 00:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
11. New Netherland-have done considerable work on this article, but question whether it is appropriate for this project, as it was a colonial province of existing countryDjflem (talk) 05:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC) Very good article and I must congratulate you for the exceptional work you and several partners did. I also suggest that you should nominate this article for GA-status as I feel that it, most assuredly, belongs there. And for future reference, colonies are considered to be in the scope of our WikiProject. Laurinavicius (talk) 02:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
12.   Principality of Stavelot-Malmedy I've just completed considerable work to this article, which was previously a stub. I've also just nominated it for Good-article review. All constructive criticism welcome. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 01:37, 24 May 2009 (UTC) GA status reached. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 22:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
13. Hello, could I get the Kingdom of the French (1791–1792) assessed? Thanks -- Jack1755 (talk) 18:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC) I've assessed this article currently as C-Class, but it only needs a couple more citations (just two or three) in order to be B-Class. Laurinavicius (talk) 19:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC) Now that some more citations are in, I've re-assessed this article as B-Class. Good work on it! Laurinavicius (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
14. Hello, I have just finished the translation of Duchy of Massa and Carrara could you rate it please?--Robyvecchio (talk) 10:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC) I've assessed the article as Start-Class, as it needs both citations and references (it currently has neither) and I would like to see more visual aids, such as images (it currently has only an infobox). Good work on it! Laurinavicius (talk) 22:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
15. another requested translation completed: Kingdom of the Lombards--Robyvecchio (talk) 21:43, 27 November 2009 (UTC) Another good article mate! I've assessed it as B-Class. It meets most of the requirements to attain GA status, but definitely needs more citations (it currently has only 35) to be a Good Article. Good work on it! Laurinavicius (talk) 02:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
16. I just expanded Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation from stub class, and created the new article Prussian Heritage Image Archive. Both need a trained eye to assess my first efforts at article writing. Ultracobalt (talk)
17. I have greatly restructured and expanded the State of Katanga article, and believe it should at least be considered for a lifting of the "Stub" class, which can no longer accurately apply. --Katangais (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC) Very good article, my friend. It's both very well-written and relatively well-cited, although it could use some more citations (although every paragraph has at least one citation, most have only one or two, which are generally from the same source) as well as a larger group of sources. In addition, including a number of images in the article, particularly in the latter half of the article, could not only be useful to the reader, but would break up the large blocks of plain text that encompasses most of the article. My regards, Laurinavicius (talk) 05:53, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
18. Myself and User:Ndaco (no longer active) have done an extensive rewrite of the article on the Aztec Empire since it was last reviewed. The article is now much more accurate, comprehensive, and thoroughly sourced. Any chance somebody could take a look at it? Snickeringshadow (talk) 20:33, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
19. Over the last two months, I have greatly expanded Nyasaland so it is now eight times the size it was when graded Start-class and it is now (I hope) a reasonable account of the period 1907 to 1964 that it was named Nyasaland. I think it is no longer incomplete or lacking references, so should be moved out of Start-class. Can it be regraded please?Shscoulsdon (talk) 21:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
20. I have also greatly expanded the British Central Africa Protectorate article, currently Stub-class. This was the name used for what became Nyasaland between 1891 and 1907, and the three main topics I have added are: details about the creation of the protectorate and its administration, the establishment of its borders with German and Portuguese territories and the colonial land settlement. It is no longer very basic description of the topic, so may be moved out of Stub-class. Can it be regraded please?Shscoulsdon (talk) 21:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
21. I have also expanded and revised the Portuguese Guinea article, currently Start-class, cutting out much duplication, as described in the Talk page. The section of the article "The Struggle for Independence" still needs expansion, but it'd not something I'm familiar with. Apart from that, the article is no longer incomplete or lacking references on the topic, so may be moved out of Start-class. Can it be re-graded please?Shscoulsdon (talk) 17:07, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
22. Mamluk Sultanate (Cairo), possible B now? Irānshahr (talk) 11:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
23. Achaemenid Empire, possible GA now? Irānshahr (talk) 15:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
24. South African Republic re-wrote and updated, please have a look Zarpboer (talk) 11:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
25. Maya civilization - I've trawled through and done a lot of work on this for the Core Contest (still running - so pick an article from the list and sign up!); I haven't finished yet and will probably take it to GA in the next month or so. I've rated it B class for all its other WikiProjects, but I see this one uses an extended checklist, so I'll let a project member verify it. Many thanks, Simon Burchell (talk) 09:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
26. Alternative theories of the location of Great Moravia - New article, hoping for an assessment and rating as well as input from editors here. Dr Crazy 102 (talk) 12:59, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
27. Lajtabánság - I recently expanded this article greatly (partly using translated material from German and Hungarian Wikipedia) and I think it should be assessed. I still have many doubts about the prose and sentence variation. Roniius (talk) 00:42, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
28. Abdurrahman Gazi - new article about an early Ottoman warrior affiliated with Ertuğrul, Osman I and Orhan. IronManCap (talk) 13:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
29. Sanjak of Dibra- I significantly rewrote the article, and expanded it with more in-depth information regarding its dissolution and completely overhauled the demographics section and reformatted it into a chart for easier reading. Eggventura (talk) 02:28, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you have made significant edits to an article within the scope of the project and would like another member to give the article an A-Class Review, please list it here.

Belgian Congo: I would like to submit the article Belgian Congo, which I have substantially re-written over the past year, for A-class status. The article is now logically organised, covers the main areas of interest in the history of the Belgian Congo and incorporates the latest scholarly research as reflected in recent English, French and Dutch academic literature (see references). Thank you, Piet Clement.

A Tag and Assessment drive is currently being planned so as to examine the thousand-plus un-assessed articles that are within the focus of our project, to re-assess all of the articles currently assessed by our project, and to find, tag, and assess all other articles that may also fit under our radar. More details will be posted here in the near-future.

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

The log for the last 30 days can be seen here. It is not transcluded here due to its length.