Welcome to the assessment department of the WikiProject Sussex! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's Sussex related articles. 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 {{WikiProject Sussex}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Sussex-related articles by quality, which serves as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist.

See also the general assessment FAQ.

1. What is the purpose of the article ratings?: The rating system allows the project to monitor the quality of articles in our subject areas, and to prioritize work on these articles. It is also utilized by the Wikipedia 1.0 program to prepare for static releases of Wikipedia content. Please note, however, that these ratings are primarily intended for the internal use of the project, and do not necessarily imply any official standing within Wikipedia as a who
2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? : Just add {{WikiProject Sussex}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Sussex}} template on an article, but it doesn't seem to be within the project's scope. 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).
4. Who can assess articles? : Any member of the Sussex 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.
5. How do I rate an article? : Check the quality scale and select the level that best matches the state of the article; then, follow the instructions 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.
6. Can I request that someone else rate an article? : Of course; to do so, please list it in the assessment requests section.
7. 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.
8. 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. Please note that some of the available levels have an associated formal review process; this is documented in the assessment scale.
9. Aren't the ratings subjective? : Yes, they are somewhat subjective, 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!
10. What if I have a question not listed here? : If your question concerns the article assessment process specifically, please refer to the discussion page for this department; for any other issues, you can go to the main project discussion page directly.

The {{WikiProject Sussex}} project banner template should be added (not subst:ed) to the talk page of every article within the scope of the project. While the template does not require any additional parameters, it has a number of optional ones that add various extra features to the banner. The full syntax is as follows:

{{WikiProject Sussex
|class=
|importance=
|unref=
|needs-photo=yes
}}

class is for the quality of the article

importance is for the importance for researchers of Sussex

unref=yes if references needed

needs-photo=yes if the article lacks a photograph.

any of the above parameters can be left blank

Comments should be added on the linked Talk sub page created by the template.

Quality assessments[edit]

An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Sussex}} 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 Sussex-related articles)		FA
A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Sussex-related articles)		A
GA (for good articles only; adds articles to Category:GA-Class Sussex-related articles)		GA
B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Sussex-related articles)		B
C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Sussex-related articles)		C
Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Sussex-related articles)		Start
Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Sussex-related articles)		Stub
FL (for featured lists only; adds articles to Category:FL-Class Sussex-related articles)		FL
List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Sussex-related articles)		List

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

NA (for any other pages where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class Sussex-related articles)		NA
??? (articles for which a valid class has not yet been provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Sussex-related articles)		???

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

Quality scale[edit]

Importance assessment[edit]

An article's importance assessment is generated from the importance parameter in the {{WikiProject Sussex}} project banner on its talk page:

{{WikiProject Sussex| ... | importance=??? | ...}}

Top

High

Mid

Low

The following values may be used for importance assessments:

• Top - The article is about one of the core topics of Sussex. Adds articles to Category:Top-importance Sussex-related articles
• High - The article is about the infrastructure or the most well-known or culturally or historically significant aspects of Sussex. Adds articles to Category:High-importance Sussex-related articles
• Mid - The article is about a topic within Sussex that may or may not be commonly known outside the Sussex area. Adds articles to Category:Mid-importance Sussex-related articles
• Low - The article is about a topic that is highly specialized within Sussex and is not generally common knowledge outside the Sussex area. Adds articles to Category:Low-importance Sussex-related articles

All articles that lack an importance rating are categorized in Category:Unknown-importance Sussex-related articles.

Importance scale[edit]

Label	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editor's experience	Example
Top	The article is one of the core topics of Sussex.	A reader who is not involved in Sussex will have high familiarity with the subject matter and should be able to relate to the topic easily.	Articles in this importance range are written in mostly generic terms, leaving technical terms and descriptions for more specialized pages.	Sussex
High	The article covers a topic that is vital to understanding the history or technology, etc of Sussex.	Most readers will at least be familiar with the topic being discussed.	These articles describe the basics beyond the core topics about Sussex and the more significant historical events in Sussex history. Articles about the most basic topics in Sussex like towns and cities and the most historically and culturally significant topics are included in this level. Some technical terms can be used within articles in this range, but where they are used, they should be explained or at least link to articles that discuss the terms in more detail.	Brighton
Mid	The article covers a topic that has a strong but not vital role in the history or technology of Sussex.	Many readers will be familiar with the topic being discussed, but a larger majority of readers may have only cursory knowledge of the overall subject.	Articles at this level will cover subjects that are well known but not necessarily vital to understand Sussex. Due to the topics covered at this level, Mid-importance articles will generally have more technical terms used in the article text.	Fishbourne Roman Palace
Low	The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of Sussex.	Few readers outside the local area of the article's topic may be familiar with the subject matter. It is likely that the reader does not know anything at all about the subject before reading the article.	Articles at this range of importance will often delve into the minutiae of Sussex, using technical terms (and defining them) as needed. Topics included at this level include small villages, local railway stations, that otherwise had no significant impact on the rest of Sussex.	Ifield railway station

Requesting an assessment[edit]

This is a list of recent requests. To add to this list please click here.

• I am not a member of this project and do not wish to be, but would ask that the article Wealden iron industry be reassessed and rerated following its recent revision. Peterkingiron 14:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done MortimerCat (talk) 21:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Ashurst Wood - I've done a lot of editing to this article and it's currently rated as a stub. It definitely needs reassessing and as I've made a large set of changes it would be more appropriate if somebody else assessed it. Thanks ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done MortimerCat (talk) 23:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Kingston near Lewes has been assessed on the UK Geography Wikiproject, but not Wikiproject Sussex. Would it be a good candidate? Autarch (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kingston was subsequently added. MortimerCat (talk) 12:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Hollingbury has been expanded and images added since it was last rated as a stub. Please could you reassess. Hzv5wk (talk) 21:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Hassocks is currently unassessed and having a particular interest in the village I would be grateful if someone could have a look at it for me. Many thanks. Paste (talk) 08:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Burgess Hill has not been rated in a fairly long time and it would seem that most of the things of the to do list have been done, if not fully to a notably greater extent. Please could you reassess. Curtis31992 (talk) 14:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Cowdray House I've just put a significant amount of history into this article, I don't think it is still a stub, as such would be grateful for someone to re-assess it. I've removed the stub assessment so it's currently unassessed. JonEastham (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Could Littlehampton Redoubt and Shoreham Redoubt please be reassessed? I have added headings, text, images, references and a bibliography to both pages. Are they still stubs? Thank you. Kinnerton (talk) 20:31, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done.--Charles (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've just merged three articles into Trotton with Chithurst (the merger was proposed 3 years ago, I thought someone should actually do it!). Can someone please reassess that article to account for the additional content? Thanks. --Tango (talk) 23:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I am not a member of the wikiproject but would like you to assess whether Jerwood Gallery in Hastings (http://www.jerwoodgallery.org/about/the-gallery) is notable enough to warrant an article. 72.244.206.38 (talk) 22:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think almost certainly.--Charles (talk) 21:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Just came across this, Sussex is rated as start class with a notice saying that it lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations, yet has 137 inline citations and has multiple, detailed sections. Could this be reassessed? Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  19:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Could someone look at Fulking - I think it's moved beyond a stub, and is now perhaps a 'B'. Topo122 (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• History of Sussex is currently listed as C-class, but I feel like it should be much higher than that - what do others think?  Seagull123  Φ  19:58, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done.----Dorkinglad (talk) 19:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sussex-related articles:

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

May 1, 2024[edit]

Assessed[edit]

• Fyning Moor (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)

April 30, 2024[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

• Brighton & Hove bus route 1 (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
• East Worthing (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)
• Treyford to Bepton Down (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed[edit]

• Jacob's Post (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)

April 27, 2024[edit]

Assessed[edit]

• St Helen's Wood (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t)

April 26, 2024[edit]

Assessed[edit]

• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Port Macquarie-Hastings Council (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in West Sussex (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)

April 25, 2024[edit]

Reassessed[edit]

• Horsham District (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t)

Assessed[edit]

• Category:YouTubers from Brighton and Hove (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)
• Category:YouTubers from Sussex (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t)