Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment

Main pageDiscussionNews &
open tasks

The assessment department of the Military history WikiProject focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's military history articles. The resulting article ratings are used within the project to aid in recognizing excellent contributions and identifying topics in need of further work.



The assessment system used by the Military history WikiProject to rate article quality consists of two parallel quality scales; one scale is used to assess regular prose articles, while the other is used to assess lists and similar non-prose articles. The progression of articles along these scales is described in greater detail below.

Prose article List article
Stub The first stage of an article's evolution is called a stub. A stub is an extremely short article that provides a basic description of the topic at best; it includes very little meaningful content, and may be little more than a dictionary definition. At this stage, it is often impossible to determine whether the topic should be covered by a prose article or a list, so this assessment level is shared between the two scales.
Arrow southwest.svg
Arrow southeast.svg
Start List A stub that undergoes some development will progress to the next stage of article evolution. An article at this stage provides some meaningful content, but is typically incomplete and lacks adequate references, structure, and supporting materials. At this stage, it becomes possible to distinguish between prose articles and lists; depending on its form, an article at this level will be assessed as a Start-Class prose article or a List-Class list.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
C CL As the article continues to develop, it will reach the C-Class level. At this stage, the article is reasonably structured and contains substantial content and supporting materials, but may still be incomplete or poorly referenced, but not both. As articles progress to this stage, the assessment process begins to take on a more structured form, and specific criteria are introduced against which articles are rated.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
B BL An article that reaches the B-Class level is complete in content and structure, adequately referenced, and includes reasonable supporting materials; overall, it provides a satisfactory encyclopedic presentation of the topic for the average reader, although it might not be written to the standard that would be expected by an expert. Articles at this stage commonly undergo peer review to solicit ideas for further improvement. B-Class is the final assessment level that can be reached without undergoing a formal review process, and is a reasonable goal for newer ors.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
GA After reaching the B-Class level, an article may be submitted for assessment as a good article. Good articles must meet a set of criteria similar to those required for the B-Class assessment level, and must additionally undergo the formal good article review process. This assessment level is available only for prose articles; no comparable level exists for lists.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
A-Class article A A-Class list AL A good or B-Class article that has undergone additional improvement may be considered for the A-Class assessment level. An A-Class article presents a complete and thorough encyclopedic treatment of a subject, such as might be written by an expert in the field; the only deficiencies permissible at this level are minor issues of style or language. To receive an A-Class rating, a candidate article must undergo the formal military history A-Class review process. The A-Class rating is the highest assessment level that may be assigned by an individual WikiProject; higher assessment levels are granted only by Wikipedia-wide independent assessment processes.
Arrow south.svg
Arrow south.svg
Featured article FA Featured list FL The featured article and featured list ratings represent the pinnacle of article evolution and the best that Wikipedia has to offer; an article at this level is professional, outstanding, and represents a definitive source for encyclopedic information. Featured status is assigned only through a thorough independent review process; this process can be grueling for the unprepared, and ors are highly advised to submit articles for A-Class review prior to nominating them for featured status.


The following tables summarize the criteria used to assess articles at each level of the quality assessment scale. In addition to the criteria, the tables list the assessment process used at each level and provide an example of an article previously assessed at that level.

Assessment criteria for prose articles
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
Featured article FA The article meets all the featured article criteria. Featured article candidacy USS Chesapeake (as of October 2021)
A-Class article A The article meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review Spendius (as of October 2021)
GA The article meets all of the good article criteria. Good article review Punic Wars (as of October 2021)
B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. Individual review 10th Texas Field Battery (as of October 2021)
C The article meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review Yellow Turban Rebellion (as of October 2021)
Start The article meets the Start-Class criteria. Individual review Battle of Monnaie (as of October 2021)
Stub The article meets none of the Start-Class criteria. Individual review Geng Yan (as of October 2021)
Assessment criteria for lists
Class Criteria Assessment process Example
Featured list FL The list meets all the featured list criteria. Featured list candidacy List of protected cruisers of France (as of October 2021)
A-Class list AL The list meets all of the A-Class criteria. A-Class review List of Partisan detachments in Bosnia and Herzegovina (as of October 2021)
BL The list meets all of the B-Class criteria. Individual review List of British colours lost in battle (as of October 2021)
CL The list meets B1 or B2 as well as B3 and B4 and B5 of the B-Class criteria. Individual review List of participants in the Nine Years' War (as of October 2021)
List The list meets the List-Class criteria. Individual review Atlanta campaign Confederate order of battle, second phase (as of October 2021)
Stub The list meets none of the List-Class criteria. Individual review List of supercavitating torpedoes (as of October 2021)


This section describes the different processes used to assess the quality of military history articles.

Individual review[]

The individual review process is used for all assessment activities up to the B-Class level. In this process, any or may review an article against the listed criteria and assign the corresponding quality rating themselves.

Article authors are free to assess their own articles under this process. However, by convention, the final assessment for a B-Class rating is typically left to an independent or; requests for an independent assessment may be made at the assessment request page.

Peer review[]

The peer review process is not used to evaluate an article for a particular assessment level directly; rather, it is a forum where article authors can solicit ideas for further improvements. Peer review is most often requested when an article is at the C-Class or B-Class level; articles at lower levels are typically so incomplete that a meaningful review is impossible, while articles at higher levels go through more formal review processes.

By convention, military history articles are typically listed in the history section of the main peer review request page; however, articles may be listed in other sections if their primary topic lies in another field.

Good article review[]

The good article nomination process is an independent review mechanism through which an article receives a "good article" quality rating. The process involves a detailed review of the article by an independent examiner, who determines whether the article meets the good article criteria.

Full instructions for requesting a good article review are provided on the good article review page.

A-Class article/list review[]

The military history A-Class review process is the most thorough and demanding assessment of article quality done by the Military history WikiProject. An article that undergoes this process must be reviewed by at least three independent examiners, each of whom must agree that the article meets all of the A-Class criteria.

Full instructions for requesting an A-Class review are provided on the A-Class review page.

Featured article/list candidacy[]

The featured article candidacy and featured list candidacy processes are an independent, Wikipedia-wide quality assessment mechanism; these processes are the only way an article can receive a "featured" quality rating. The process involves a comprehensive review of the article by multiple independent examiners, all of whom must agree that the article meets the featured article or list criteria.

Full instructions for submitting a featured article or list candidacy are provided on the corresponding candidacy page. Editors are advised to carefully review the submission instructions; failing to follow them correctly may cause the submission to be rejected.


An article's quality assessment is generated from the class parameter in the {{WPMILHIST}} project banner on its talk page:


The following values may be used for the class parameter to describe the quality of the article:

The class parameter should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following classes may be used for non-article pages; many are automatically generated by the template when it is placed on a page of the corresponding type:


See also the general assessment FAQ and the project's B-Class assessment & criteria FAQ and A-Class review & criteria 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 {{WPMILHIST}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.
3. Someone put a {{WPMILHIST}} 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 Military history 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. Can I assess articles that I have written or contributed significantly to?
For the most part, yes—in fact, you are encouraged to do so. B-Class assessment, by convention, is generally undertaken by an independent or (requests can be made here), and A-Class promotion requires the consensus of multiple independent reviewers. However, if your article falls within the Stub- to C-Class range, by awarding the rating yourself you are helping to prevent the assessment requests process becoming overloaded.
6. 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.
7. Can I request that someone else rate an article?
Of course; to do so, please list it in the section for assessment requests below.
8. 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.
9. Where can I get more comments about an article?
The peer review process can conduct more thorough examination of articles; please submit it for review there.
10. 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.
11. 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!
12. 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, or contact the project coordinators directly.


Requests for A-Class review[]

Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of ClancartyThirty Years' WarList of British infantry brigades of the Second World War (1–100)Nikephoros III BotaneiatesEucherius (son of Stilicho)Siege of NgatapaIvo HerenčićSecond Battle of KharkovAnti-Fascist Council for the National Liberation of Yugoslavia42 cm Gamma howitzerList of British infantry brigades of the Second World War (101–309 and named)Ho Chi Minh trailMichael HerrickMarmaduke–Walker duelSiege of BreteuilBattle of Glasgow, MissouriLéon Degrelle

Requests for assessment[]

Please note that this section is transcluded from a separate requests page, which you may wish to add to your watchlist.

Editors can self-assess articles against the five B-class criteria(FAQ) up to and including C-Class. If you have made significant improvements to an article against one or more of B-class criteria and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below, specifying which criteria you have worked on. If you feel unable to assess against one or more of the B-class criteria, please say so when posting. Requests for formal A-Class review should be made at the review department. Please consider entering articles you have improved in the military history article writing contest.

Experienced assessors are encouraged to take a look at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#AutoCheck report for November and check a few of ≈ B-Class assessments. Feel free to downgrade them if you consider they don't meet one or more the criteria. Please also delete any that you have checked. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight/Assessment, whose articles often overlap with military history topics.

Georgejdorner Vami_IV I think there are notability issues here. I do not see him as an ace (under most cr systems, he has 3.83 victories). See section at Talk:Karl Teichmann
As I explained to this same or on Talk:Karl Teichmann, there were no fractional victories awarded in WWI by anyone. The article on Teichmann contains sources for his victories; these sources insist he was an ace. Ignoring the sources given and e-evaluating WWI victories by some scoring system that did not exist during WWI is a bizarre attempt to rewrite history.Georgejdorner (talk) 23:09, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
  • George C. Marshall Complete improvement of all references using shortened footnote templates. Additional references inserted as well. General George Marshall (talk) 17:16, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
    Still contains many paragraphs without references. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:58, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Romanian Air Corps - Rewrite of a previously incorrect redirect. Aiming for the B-class. Alin2808 (talk) 14:31, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
    • Some references are missing. I've left notes on article talk.--Tomobe03 (talk) 13:48, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
      • Edited, thank you! If I missed anything else or something needs further clarification, leave the notes in the article talk page. Alin2808 (talk) 23:51, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Headquarters South West Another one which I've recently revamped. Again, please tag me if you have any comments, cheers! J-Man11 (talk) 16:34, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
    • @Coldstreamer20: Start class. I made some minor s and updated its assessment to pass b2 (Coverage and Accuracy). Because of the article's brief lead, however, it fails b3 (Structure). Once this is addressed, it should be good for B-class.
  • Zubayr ibn al-Awam done major improvement for 1 month earlier. need attention for review to be improved to B class Ahendra (talk) 22:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
    • A solid article, but it fails b4 (Grammar). I tried to do some copying, but my grammar is also subpar to a lesser degree. I think this article could benefit from a copy from WP:GOCE, so I have requested one there. FredModulars (talk) 04:50, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
    • This article appears to thoroughly cover the subject, though as FredModulars noted, there are some grammatical problems (but I've seen much worse). Unfortunately, the article is 195K bytes and it would take a long time to properly assess. Djmaschek (talk) 13:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Karl Urban (aviator) - Expanded lede, added graphics, general clean up.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:48, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Warsaw concentration camp - Expanded from Polish GA article; found some more sources. Let me know if this article stands the B-class probe. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 09:14, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
  • 196th Battalion (Western Universities), CEF Expanded this article by a great deal, and would appreciate a new rating! CplKlinger (talk) 21:43, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Wilhelm Fahrmbacher Expanded and referenced. Please assess for B class. Thanks. --Shimbo (talk) 10:22, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
    • B class. I made a few minor fixes. Djmaschek (talk) 13:26, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Armistice of Belgrade expanded and referenced article on armistice agreement ending the WWI for Hungary. Please check against B-class criteria.--Tomobe03 (talk) 15:50, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
  • 585th Bombardment Squadron Rewritten and citations added. Please review for B class. --Lineagegeek (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
  • Battle of Resaca - American Civil War. Please assess for B class. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 05:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
    • B class; I ed the Lede so that the flow is more logical (I hope :)), minor pagination and wording changes, couple of comments on TP.Robinvp11 (talk) 19:45, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Károly Kaszala - Bio of Great War flying ace. Expanded from stub. Got lucky on photos. Please assess for B Class in WP MilHist, WP Aviation Bio.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:39, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
    • The article has this error on every citation: Harv error: this link doesn't point to any citation. In order to properly use sfn format citations, the references need to be in template:cite book format. I will fix the Varriale reference, and leave you to fix the other two. Once you do that, the problem will clear up. Djmaschek (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Erroll Tremlett – meant to list this here some weeks ago and forgot! New article, please assess. StickyWicket (talk) 14:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
    • B class. Nice work. I added a photo and a link to where his picture (under copyright) can be seen. Djmaschek (talk) 05:29, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Isaías de Noronha minister of the Brazilian Navy and member of the 1930 provisional military junta. Expanded from one-sentence stub. Please assess. Thanks. FredModulars (talk) 04:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Henry Withers New bio of 18th century British general. B? Robinvp11 (talk) 18:46, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Please also check the military history assessment backlog for articles needing assessment.

Assessment backlogs[]

Please help to clear any backlogs of unassessed articles in the following categories:


  • Quality operations: A bot-generated daily log which lists articles Reassessed, Assessed and Removed.
  • Popular pages: List of top articles with the most frequent views, updated monthly.

Task forces (general topics)[]

Task forces (national and regional)[]

Task forces (periods and conflicts)[]

Special projects[]

Operation Majestic Titan assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase I) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase II) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase III) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase IV) assessment statistics


Operation Majestic Titan (Phase V) assessment statistics