Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies/Assessment

message: I was cleaning up the template section of the Project page when I noticed that there are two stub templates:
1. 
:: Created in March 2005.
:: Usually placed on the article page.
:: Transcludes article in :Category:LGBT stubs.
2. 
:: Created in August 2006.
:: Usually placed on the article's talk page.
:: Transcludes article in :Category:Stub-Class LGBT articles.
Is there some way to include the :Category:LGBT stubs in :Category:Stub-Class LGBT articles? --Tiger MarcROAR! 00:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The two are not really related. In any case, I'm currently marking them all using AWB and I'm almost done. I'd prefer to continue to do it by hand, because I can see article that aren't stubs anymore, or articles that need to be deleted, that a bot or an automatic process wouldn't. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the difference? Sorry, it's not clear to me. Tiger MarcROAR! 01:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The difference is that the first one goes on the article page.  The second one "lays claim" (not really) to the article as part of the LGBT studies project and assesses the article as "Stub class".  There isn't a way (with current wiki software) to tag the article with the new assessment template and have it automatically add the stub to the main page.  Hope that helps :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 02:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry. My question wasn't clear. What's the difference between the two cats: :Category:LGBT stubs and :Category:Stub-Class LGBT articles? Is one LGBT studies versus plain old LGBT? Dev920 says they're not really related. Should I put both on articles? --Tiger MarcROAR! 21:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

text: One is a Wikipedia category to help readers identify LGBT stubs. The other is an internal classification we at LGBT studies have put on it in oder to help us identify what needs to be improved. Basically, tag the article itself with LGBT-stub, and the talkpage with LGBTProject. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two kinds of LGBT stubs 

message: Just curious if anyone is changing tags from other wikiprojects when adding our tag?  For instance, since I'm doing the actors category, I'm running in to WP:WPBIO tags on most of the articles.  When I add ours, I review the article (quickly) and make a snap judgment of what class it is.  I just add our tag and class - are other people adding their class to, say, the WP:WPBIO tag? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not. I don't believe in doing WP:BIO's work for them. :) But I'm probably just being cantankerous. I sometimes used to add them when I first started, but now I'm using AWB for tagging a lot, I don't change the other templates as well. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other project's assessment tags 

message: Dev, what's the web address for the tool that updates WPV1 Assessment Log? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should still be http://www.math.ucla.edu/~aoleg/wp/wp10/run_wp10.html . Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sweet - thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 18:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manual Assessment Update? 

message: The Evan Wolfson article is currently rated a B-Class when I think it is pretty clearly an A-class article.  It is sourced, categorized, imaged, balanced, exhaustive, and well-written.  --DavidShankBone 19:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of which, I don't know the process and I've been meaning to ask.  When I go through articles, I'll rate them anywhere from Stub to B, but not A.  How does an article become A class? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I've nearly always had my judgement questioned when rating A classes, so I came to the conclusion that I would only give an A rating to a FARCed article of a failed FAC. I think other people though rate things As that are either better than your average GA, or haven't been through the GA process at all and therefore can't be given that rating. I don't know, I've not yet come across an LGBT article that has needed a rating higher than a B! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Evan Wolfson

message: Hi,
You guys (and gals) seem to be very up to date with your assessments, have you a backlog of tagging or anything that needs doing?
As i have a bot approved for tagging (User:Reedy Bot) using WP:AWB and Kingbotk's Plugin.
Let me know if you have, or want me to run through your cats to check for them (can do a list compare of tagged articles and the articles in the cats)
Reedy Boy 22:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you do, just post the cats here, (if they are stub categories, i can auto tag as stub). Reedy Boy 23:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Reedy Boy!  I've been running SatyrBot to traverse the categories within the spectrum of the project to find articles lacking banners.  Thanks for the offer and I'll let you know if we run in to anything! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untagged Articles 

message: Though we now have the LGBT core topics list, it appears that this bot will be looking for the standardized importance rankings for composing offline releases. I'm afraid the LGBT articles will be at the mercy of a backfill algorithm (which appears to look at the number of links from other articles) unless they are assigned priority/importance by humans. -- Beland 00:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Priority/Importance 

message: Has there been any thought given to adding , ,  or  to your assessment scale? This would save  for WP pages (like this one). We have recently done a similar thing at WP:VG, and it is becoming really useful for project maintenance. Our template tags non-mainspace pages by namespace too, though it's still a little buggy... Just an idea. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 06:23, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template/Disambig/Portal/Image class 

message: On Carlos Monsiváis's talkpage, another editor outed this recently dead Mexican poet. Although, it appears to be public knowledge as online articles were provided, that's a tacky way of doing this. As the editor, who 5x expanded his article, I humbly request your wikiproject adopt his article, improve it and bring it to a B classed article. I firmly believe it could be FA with copyedits. ----moreno oso (talk) 22:32, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, I'm a pretty good Wiki-defender, poor editor in terms of writing and building articles skills but will help whenever I can with article. This man was a leading intellengisia type (the German word for a brainy person who crosses generations). There are at least two articles on his 50s Generation and museum that can be developed per the talkpage and article respectively. ----moreno oso (talk) 22:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Carlos Monsiváis

message: In this article, the article for Jack Harkness is given as an example of an A-Class article, but if you look at Jack Harkness' talk page, its class is given as GA-class. Which is correct? --66.167.244.240 (talk) 19:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: GA is better than A, so it was probably upgraded after the writing of this assessment description.  I'll see about finding a new one for the description :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Jack Harkness Article Grade?

message: Hello, your project includes an article on the musician June Millington that has long been classified as a Stub. I have recently expanded the article significantly, so I suggest that someone from the project consider whether it now deserves a better assessment. Given my own work in other projects, I suggest a "C" grade. Sincerely, --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:13, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Assessed to B class - Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 17:13, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  June Millington 

message: I have made a change to requesting assessments from adding a done check mark to a completed assessment to removing the request and leaving an appropriate edit summary by the assessor.  This is in line with other WikiProjects, as there is no need to have years worth of assessments left on the page.  I have also tackled the backlog of assessments - years? -and will continue to assess articles requested.  Any help in assessments is welcome.  I you would like an article assessed by a neutral party, do add your request to the bottom of the list at Requesting an Assessment.  Cheers Gmcbjames (talk) 18:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section: Requesting an assessment 

message: Greetings, all. Frankly, and though I'm long in the tooth as far as my Wikipedia age is concerned, I'm surprised to discover that articles in the LGBT project are not getting an assessment as to their overall encyclopaeidic importance. I  suggest we need it. (This is an informal proposal to get things, hopefully, rolling. Perhaps a more formal process, i.e. an RfC, may subsequently be needed.) -The Gnome (talk) 18:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @The Gnome I totally agree. I wrote about it here. Thanks for raising this! Darcyisverycute (talk) 12:01, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance assessments