|
Welcome to the assessment department of WikiProject Anime and manga! This department focuses on assessing the quality of articles under the project's scope. While much of the work is done in conjunction with the WP:1.0 program, the 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 {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Anime and manga articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.
| Anime and manga articles by quality and importance
|
| Quality
|
Importance
|
| Top
|
High
|
Mid
|
Low
|
NA
|
Total
|
 FA
|
|
2
|
7
|
5
|
|
14
|
| FL
|
|
1
|
|
57
|
|
58
|
 GA
|
7
|
25
|
85
|
337
|
|
454
|
| B
|
8
|
33
|
64
|
326
|
|
431
|
| C
|
14
|
76
|
252
|
1,669
|
|
2,011
|
| Start
|
12
|
82
|
281
|
7,833
|
|
8,208
|
| Stub
|
|
2
|
75
|
4,918
|
|
4,995
|
| List
|
|
5
|
17
|
2,500
|
3
|
2,525
|
| Category
|
|
|
|
|
2,866
|
2,866
|
| Disambig
|
|
|
|
|
54
|
54
|
| File
|
|
|
|
|
7,802
|
7,802
|
| Portal
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
9
|
| Project
|
|
|
|
|
284
|
284
|
| Redirect
|
|
1
|
7
|
760
|
11,706
|
12,474
|
| Template
|
|
|
|
|
981
|
981
|
| NA
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
4
|
| Other
|
|
|
2
|
6
|
59
|
67
|
| Assessed
|
41
|
227
|
790
|
18,411
|
23,768
|
43,237
|
| Total
|
41
|
227
|
790
|
18,411
|
23,768
|
43,237
|
| WikiWork factors (?)
|
ω = 81,255
|
Ω = 5.04
|
- How do I add an article to the WikiProject?
- Just add {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
- Someone put a {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} template on an article, but it's not an anime or manga related topic. What should I do?
- Because of the large number of articles we deal with, we occasionally make mistakes and add tags to articles that shouldn't have them. If you notice one, feel free to remove the tag, and optionally leave a note on the talk page of this department (or directly with the person who tagged the article).
- What is the purpose of the article ratings?
- The objective of the rating system is twofold. First, it allows the project to monitor the quality of the articles within our scope and to prioritize work on these articles. Second, the ratings will be used by the Wikipedia 1.0 project to compile a "released version" of Wikipedia that can be distributed to readers. Please note, however, that these ratings are meant for the internal use of the project, and do not imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a whole.
- Who can assess articles?
- Any member of the Anime and manga WikiProject is free to add or change the rating of an article. Editors who are not participants in this project are also welcome to assess articles, but should defer to consensus within the project in case of procedural disputes. Editors should also note that B-Class assessments require project consensus, while GA, FA, and FL assessments have associated formal review processes that must be followed.
- How do I rate an article?
- Check the assessment scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article, then follow the guidelines below to add the rating to the project banner on the article's talk page. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
- How can I make a request for someone from the project to assess an article?
- Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
- 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 details or feedback about an article?
- The peer review process is one that results in a more thorough examination of articles; to ensure project members also view the article, make sure to list it at our peer review page.
- 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 (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!
- What about lists?
- Lists of episodes, characters, and chapters are assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status. Lists which are pure lists of links, however, should be assessed as list class, as they have no real content to be evaluated.
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 assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Anime and manga}} project banner on its talk page:
- {{WikiProject Anime and manga| ... | class=??? | ...}}
The following values may be used for the class parameter:
There are other classes used by WP:A&M which are automatically assessed by the template based on namespace, and should not be rated manually. These classes are Category, Draft, File, Portal, Project, Template, and NA/Non-Article. A full list of valid class names and abbreviations can be found at Template:WikiProject Anime and manga/class.
Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed anime and manga articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.
The scale for assessments is defined at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Articles are divided into the following categories.
| 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. |
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. |
- Manga and anime articles
The Heart of Thomas (2021)
Naruto (2020)
School Rumble (2010)
- Magazines
Shojo Beat (2009) |
| 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.
- 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.
- 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; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. |
List of Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion episodes (2013)
List of Naruto characters (2008)
List of Gantz chapters (2008)
|
| 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. |
Rozen Maiden (2013)
Syaoran (Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle) (2013)
|
| 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 does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. 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. |
Edward Elric
(as of October 2008)
|
| 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. |
Free Collars Kingdom
(as of January 2009)
|
| 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. Improve the grammar, spelling, and writing style; decrease the use of jargon. |
Shikabane Hime
(as of December 2008)
|
| 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. |
Enoki Films
(as of July 2008)
|
| 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 programs broadcast by Animax (as of February 2008)
|
Additional guidelines[edit]
The following are guidelines for series articles.
- FA class — Passes WP:FAC. See also FA advice and the Featured article criteria.
- GA class — Covers everything well; must be nominated at WP:GAN and passed by an impartial reviewer in order to qualify. Before nominating, the page should include inline sourcing for controversial statements, contain critical reception information, and have no image copyright issues.
- B class — Coherent structure, proper lead, fair amount of information for each section.
- C class — Decent structure, lacking some information (typically out of universe info).
- Start class — Some structure, basic overview of the topic present.
- Stub class — Little structure, severely lacking content. The article may include flaws such as embedded lists without descriptions or lack an infobox.
The following are guidelines for episode, character, and chapter lists. Lists are normally assessed using the same scale as other articles; however, they progress towards featured list rather than featured article status, and are not assessed as good articles.
- FL class — Passes WP:FLC. See also the Featured list criteria.
- List class — Transcludes sublists, volume lists which have been split into sublists, or lists which have no potential as articles (such as stand-alone lists and lists which act as navigational aids; this includes, amongst other, lists of series licensed by a publisher). Articles assessed as list class jump straight to featured list status after passing WP:FLC, instead of progressing along the regular assessment scale.
- B class — Coherent structure, proper lead, well-referenced with no missing information.
- C class — Decent structure; lacks Japanese chapter titles, release information, or references.
- Start class — Some structure, basic overview of the topic present; uses the correct formatting templates, but severely lacks content. Basic lead is present.
- Stub class — Little structure; severely lacking content, such as chapter names, release dates, or plot summaries. Does not use the appropriate formatting templates ({{Japanese episode list}} for episode lists, or {{Graphic novel list}} for chapter lists) but a simple table, bullet list, numbered list or no formatting at all.
Special emphasis is given to the six criteria that B-Class articles for the WikiProject should meet:
| B |
- 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 does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. 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.
|
Priority must be regarded as a relative term. If importance values are applied within this project, these only reflect the perceived importance to this project and to the work groups the article falls under. An article judged to be "Top-importance" in one context may be only "Mid-importance" in another project. The criteria used for rating article priority 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). Articles rated as "low-importance" importance are not necessarily unwanted, but may be candidates for merging into more relevant when appropriate.
All lists, video games and any other notable article that falls within the WikiProject's scope, including most websites, not described in the table below are of low-importance.
| Type
|
Top
|
High
|
Mid
|
| Definition
|
This article is of the utmost importance as it forms the basis of all information.
|
This article is fairly important as it covers a general area of knowledge.
|
This article is relatively important as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
|
| Series (Main article)
|
N/A
|
Lasting impact decades after it was initially released, e.g. Gundam.
|
Achieved wide commercial success or critically acclaimed outside of Japan, e.g. YuYu Hakusho.
|
| Characters
|
N/A
|
Characters that have become cultural icons outside of the series, e.g. Char Aznable, Goku, Pikachu
|
Well known characters, e.g. Belldandy.
|
| Episodes and movies
|
N/A
|
Individually significant episodes, e.g. "Dennō Senshi Porygon".
|
N/A
|
| Individuals
|
Individuals with an essential historical influence on the medium, e.g. Osamu Tezuka, Leiji Matsumoto.
|
Individuals with a career of highly influential works, or historically significant accomplishments, e.g. Akira Toriyama, Eiichiro Oda.
|
Individuals with a career of internationally successful or critically acclaimed works, e.g. Ken Akamatsu.
|
| Companies, organisations, websites
|
Highly influential companies, particularly the major Japanese companies involved in manga and/or anime production, e.g. Sunrise, Shueisha, Shogakukan.
|
Top licensors and distributors of manga/anime in English language countries, e.g. Viz Media, Tokyopop, A.D. Vision
|
Most other well-known licensors in the industry, e.g. Seven Seas Entertainment, CMX, Central Park Media, Go! Comi.
|
| Other
|
Core topics, e.g. anime, manga.
|
Sub-articles of core topics, e.g. History of anime, History of manga.
|
Large conventions, e.g. Anime Expo.
|
- Links to archives: 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
- Wonder Egg Priority - I have dramatically expanded this article with details of the subject's production and critical reception and believe it now warrants another look. Feedback would be much appreciated. ostensibly singular userpage (inquire within) 18:53, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Idolmaster Movie: Beyond the Brilliant Future! - I have expanded this article. I want to see if this can be reassessed beyond its current class. Thank you. Centcom08 (talk) 22:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The Quintessential Quintuplets Movie - I have been expanding and monitoring this article since June 3, 2022. I believe it is time to see if this can be reassessed beyond its current class. Centcom08 (talk) 05:23, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Teasing Master Takagi-san: The Movie - This article that I have created has been expanded for the past six months since its theatrical release. I would like to see if it can have a new assessment. Centcom08 (talk) 14:43, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Laid-Back Camp Movie - This article that I have created has been expanded for the past six months since its theatrical release. I would like to see if it can have a new assessment. Centcom08 (talk) 07:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Production I.G - I have expanded upon the previous lists of works that were in the article by making tables with sources. I have also reworked the history section of the article. I think the article is due for a reassessment and I would like it to be reviewed by an outside observer. Thanks! Orion409 (talk) 17:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Yakushiji Ryōko no Kaiki Jikenbo - Expanded on a bit since the novels have an audiobook. Also updated references related to the novels. Ominae (talk) 04:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Misa Hayase - I have spent the past few months radically rewriting this article, removing WP:Fancruft, bringing it closer to actual compliance with WP:WAF and especially MOS:REALWORLD. I have cleaned up the article from its previous plot summary problems; I have made the lead much tighter and ensured it immediately tells the reader who she is, and why she's notable; added WP:RS sources to verify claims made, keeping reliance on sources like IMDb to the smallest extent (only to confirm voice acting credits); added sections on her production and development process, her characterization, her reception, and her legacy. I have also managed to find scholarly analysis that refers to her as a strong female character pivotal figure in the evolution of the Real robot genre. I believe the article deserves another look now. Odysseus Giacosa (talk) 12:59, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Rascal Does Not Dream - Ranked low importance, despite having 2 anime series', 3 movies with one more upcoming. Internationally recognized (In my Philippine High School a lot of people have heard about it in some way and a decent number have watched it). Another user also left a similar comment on the project's talk page. Anonymous user. April 5 2026
Purge this page's server cache
Featured list candidates
Good article nominees
- (4 more...)
Requests for comments
Peer reviews
A full log of assessment changes for the past seven days is available; unfortunately, due to its extreme size, it cannot be transcluded directly. Archives of previous
featured article candidates
(2006,
2007,
2008),
A-class reviews
(2006,
2007,
2008),
and good article reviews
(2008)
are also available.
|
