Wikipedia:WikiProject Death/Assessment

Main page

Assessment

Templates

Categories

Resources

Participants

Suicide task force

Death articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total FA 5 25 48 78 FL 1 2 9 12 A 2 2 GA 1 20 53 158 232 B 12 77 279 801 1,169 C 14 114 602 2,051 2 2,783 Start 10 82 781 5,278 1 2 6,154 Stub 34 1,291 1,325 List 3 37 216 1,023 21 1,300 Category 1 16,273 16,274 Disambig 92 92 File 101 101 Portal 1 1 Project 1 22 23 Template 1 99 100 NA 2 11 233 246 Other 19 19 Assessed 40 340 1,995 10,671 16,861 4 29,911 Unassessed 1 1 Total 40 340 1,995 10,671 16,861 5 29,912 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 53,839 Ω = 4.58 The assessment department of the Death WikiProject focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's death-related articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work, and are also expected to play a role in the Version 1.0 Editorial Team program. The assessment is done in a distributed fashion through parameters in the {{WikiProject Death}} project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Death articles by quality, which serve as the foundation for an automatically generated worklist. FAQ 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 whole. 2. How do I add an article to the WikiProject? Just add {{WikiProject Death}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else. 3. Someone put a {{WikiProject Death}} 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 project talk page (or directly with the person who tagged the article). 4. Who can assess articles? Any member of the Death 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. 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. 7. What if I don't agree with a rating? 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. 8. 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! Assessment instructions An article's assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WikiProject Death}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax): {{WikiProject Death| class=??? }} The following values may be used: FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class Death articles) A (adds articles to Category:A-Class Death articles) GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class Death articles) B (adds articles to Category:B-Class Death articles) C (adds articles to Category:C-Class Death articles) Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class Death articles) Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class Death articles) FL (adds articles to Category:FL-Class Death articles) List (adds articles to Category:List-Class Death articles) Dab (for disambiguation pages; adds pages to Category:Disambig-Class Death articles) Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed Death articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below. Quality scale Grading scheme WikiProject article quality grading scheme 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. 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. Cleopatra (as of June 2018)  FL  The article has attained featured list status. 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 has attained good article status, having been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations. More detailed criteria The article meets the good article 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; all inline citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; it contains no original research; and it contains no copyright violations nor 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 (but not equaling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. 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 is mostly complete and without major problems but requires some further work to reach good article standards. More detailed criteria The article meets the six B-Class 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. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, 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. Human (as of April 2019)  C  The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains much 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; need editing for clarity, balance, or flow; or contain policy violations, such as bias or original research. Articles on fictional topics are likely to be marked as C-Class if they are written from an in-universe perspective. It is most likely that C-Class articles have a reasonable encyclopedic style. 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 usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style compliance non-existent. The article should satisfy fundamental content policies, such as Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Frequently, the referencing is inadequate, although enough sources are usually provided to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted. 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. Ring-tailed cardinalfish (as of June 2018)  Stub  A very basic description of the topic. Can be well-written, but may also have significant content issues. More detailed criteria The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short; however, if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category. Although Stub-class articles are the lowest class of the normal classes, they are adequate enough to be an accepted article, though they do have risks of being dropped from being an article altogether. 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. Crescent Falls (as of June 2018)  List  Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list, 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 Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 1947 (as of June 2018) Importance scale Need: A measure of a subject's importance, regardless of its quality Top {{top-importance}} Subject is a must-have for a print encyclopedia. High {{high-importance}} Subject is exceptionally important. Mid {{mid-importance}} Subject contributes a depth of knowledge. Low {{low-importance}} Subject fills in important details. NA {{NA-importance}} Subject importance is not applicable. Log Death articles by quality, assessment log May 11, 2022 Reassessed Hotel Saratoga explosion (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t) Assessed 2021 Ecuador prison riots (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Disambig-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) 2022 Ecuador prison riots (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Category:Burials in Richmond, Virginia, by place (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in France (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Deaths in September 1993 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as List-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Engelbert Valentin Niedermeyer (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Peter Poole (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Removed Category:Lists of sportspeople who died in wars (talk) removed. Category:Ukrainian military personnel killed in the Russo-Ukrainian War (talk) removed. May 10, 2022 Reassessed Tomb of Samuel (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from B-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Assessed Draft:Angelo Madsen Minax (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Burials at Hebrew Cemetery (Richmond, Virginia) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in Australia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in Australia by state or territory (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in New South Wales (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in Western Australia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Executed Malaysian people (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Malaysian people executed abroad (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Neurological disease deaths in Taiwan (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People executed by British Malaya (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People executed by British Sarawak (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People executed by Malaysia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Taiwan (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) May 9, 2022 Renamed 2022 Changsha building collapse renamed to Changsha building collapse. Spirit (animating force) renamed to Spirit (vital essence). Assessed Bull Street Cemetery (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Changsha building collapse (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia by country (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in Argentina (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths from dementia in Mexico (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Spirit (vital essence) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as High-Class. (rev · t) May 8, 2022 Renamed Maynaguri train accident renamed to Bikaner–Guwahati Express derailment. Reassessed 2022 Quezon City fire (talk) reassessed. Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t) Killing of Latjor Tuel (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Assessed Bikaner–Guwahati Express derailment (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Cheung Tze-keung (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Gilbert Postelle (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Hotel Saratoga explosion (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t) Suicide by hanging (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Mid-Class. (rev · t) May 7, 2022 Reassessed Round Valley Settler Massacres of 1856–1859 (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to B-Class. (rev · t) Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class. (rev · t) Assessed Cosimo Cordì (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) David Barron Corona (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Death of Alexis Martínez (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Death of Keltie Byrne (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Deaths in April 2022 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as List-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Draft:Die (talk) assessed. Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Lists of deaths in 1912 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) May 6, 2022 Renamed Infant Mortality Rate renamed to Infant mortality rate. Reassessed Omar Toft (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Sinjar massacre (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Start-Class to C-Class. (rev · t) Assessed Category:1849 murders by continent (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:1849 murders in North America (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:1849 murders in the United States (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:1859 murders in North America (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:1859 murders in the United States (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) 2022 Changsha building collapse (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Stub-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Calabria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Campania (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Emilia-Romagna (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Liguria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Lombardy (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Marche (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Tuscany (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Umbria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Veneto (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Enforced disappearances in the Soviet Union (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Infant mortality rate (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as C-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Mid-Class. (rev · t) Category:Neurological disease deaths in Brazil (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Neurological disease deaths in Chile (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Neurological disease deaths in South Korea (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Neurological disease deaths in the People's Republic of China (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Calabria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Campania (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Emilia-Romagna (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Liguria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Lombardy (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Marche (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Tuscany (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Umbria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:People murdered in Veneto (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Round Valley Settler Massacres of 1856–1859 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Unassessed-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Unknown-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths by country (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Barbados (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Belgium (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Bolivia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Brazil (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Bulgaria (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Canada (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Chile (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in China (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Cuba (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Hong Kong (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Norway (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Queensland (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in South Australia (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in South Korea (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Spain (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Sweden (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Switzerland (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in Victoria (Australia) (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in the Australian Capital Territory (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in the Czech Republic (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Stroke-related deaths in the People's Republic of China (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Ukrainian military personnel killed in the Russo-Ukrainian War (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Underworld gods (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Works about assassinations (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Removed Category:Forced disappearances in the Soviet Union (talk) removed. Lilin (talk) removed. May 5, 2022 Renamed Maqbaratoshoara renamed to Mausoleum of Poets. Reassessed Mortuary Temples (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Terminal lucidity (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Stub-Class to Start-Class. (rev · t) Assessed Category:Deaths by person in Maryland (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Italy by region (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Lazio (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Category:Deaths in Sicily (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Mausoleum of Poets (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Start-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as Low-Class. (rev · t) Category:Prisoners who died from COVID-19 (talk) assessed. Quality assessed as Category-Class. (rev · t) Importance assessed as NA-Class. (rev · t) Removed Suicide by hanging (talk) removed. Draft:Uddipta Hazarika (talk) removed.