WikiProject Novels
The WikiProject Project page + talk Members talk Guestbook talk Coordinators talk → Current or Recent Elections + talk JobCentre talk Announcements (template) talk Literature Portal talk Article information Resources talk Style guidelines talk → Article (pattern template) talk → Char. Article (pattern template) talk → Book infobox (pattern) talk → Short Story infobox (pattern) talk → NovelSeries infobox (pattern) talk → Character infobox (pattern) talk Current discussions General discussion forum (+) talk Novel categorization talk Work in progress Main work list talk Maintenance lists talk Disputed novel articles talk Disputed book cover images talk Articles needed talk Infobox needed talk Infobox Incomplete talk New articles talk Departments Assessment talk → Assessment Top priority talk Collaboration talk Outreach talk Peer review talk Task forces 19th century task force talk Australian task force talk Chronicles of Narnia task force talk Crime task force talk Fantasy task force talk His Dark Materials task force talk Lemony Snicket task force talk Percy Jackson task force talk Science fiction task force talk Shannara task force talk Short story task force talk Sword of Truth task force talk Twilight task force talk Templates Project banner talk Infobox Book (protected) talk Infobox Short story talk Infobox character talk Infobox Novel series talk Userboxes talk
This box: view • talk • edit • changes

Hello and welcome to the assessment department of the Novels WikiProject! This department focuses on assessing the quality of Wikipedia's novel and novel-related articles. 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 {{NovelsWikiProject}} talk page project banner; this causes the articles to be placed in the appropriate sub-categories of Category:Novel articles by quality and Category:Novel articles by importance, which serve as the sources for an automatically generated worklist.

Contents 1 Frequently asked questions 2 Instructions 2.1 Quality scale 2.2 Importance scale 2.3 Requesting an assessment 3 Statistics 3.1 Raw counts 3.2 Monthly changes 4 Log

[edit] Frequently asked questions

How do I add an article to the WikiProject? 

Just add {{NovelsWikiProject}} to the talk page; there's no need to do anything else.

Someone put a {{NovelsWikiProject}} template on an article, but it's not a novel or related article. What should I do? 

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).

How can I get my article rated? 

Please list it in the section for assessment requests below.

Who can assess articles? 

Any member of the Novels WikiProject is free to add—or change—the rating of an article.

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.

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 WP:1.0 have been able to devise; if you have a better idea, please don't hesitate to let us know!

How can I keep track of changes in article ratings? 

A full log of changes over the past thirty days is available here. If you are just looking for an overview, however, the monthly statistics may be more accessible.

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 ask them on the main project general forum page, or contact one of the other members directly.

[edit] Instructions

An article's assessment is generated from the class and importance parameters in the {{NovelsWikiProject}} project banner on its talk page (see the project banner instructions for more details on the exact syntax):

{{NovelsWikiProject| ... | class=??? | importance=??? | ...}}

The following values may be used for the class parameter:

• FA (adds articles to Category:FA-Class novel articles)
• FL (adds articles to Category:FL-Class novel articles) - Featured List (subject to the same controls as FA)
• A (adds articles to Category:A-Class novel articles)
• GA (adds articles to Category:GA-Class novel articles)
• B (adds articles to Category:B-Class novel articles)
• C (adds articles to Category:C-Class novel articles)
• Start (adds articles to Category:Start-Class novel articles)
• Stub (adds articles to Category:Stub-Class novel articles)
• NA (for pages, such as templates or disambiguation pages, where assessment is unnecessary; adds pages to Category:NA-Class novel articles)
• Cat (adds articles to Category:Category-Class novel articles)
• Dab (adds articles to Category:Disambig-Class novel articles)
• List (adds articles to Category:List-Class novel articles)
• Portal (adds articles to Category:Portal-Class novel articles)
• Project (adds articles to Category:Project-Class novel articles)
• Redirect (adds articles to Category:Redirect-Class novel articles)
• Template (adds articles to Category:Template-Class novel articles)

Articles for which a valid class is not provided are listed in Category:Unassessed novel articles. The class should be assigned according to the quality scale below.

The following values may be used for the importance parameter:

• Top (adds articles to Category:Top-importance novel articles)
• High (adds articles to Category:High-importance novel articles)
• Mid (adds articles to Category:Mid-importance novel articles)
• Low (adds articles to Category:Low-importance novel articles)

The parameter is not used if an article's class is set to NA, and may be omitted in those cases. The importance should be assigned according to the importance scale below.

[edit] Quality scale

Class	Criteria	Reader's experience	Editing suggestions	Example
FA	The article has attained featured article status. More detailed criteria The article meets the featured article criteria: A featured article exemplifies our very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the requirements for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes. It is— (a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard; (b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context; (c) well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature on the topic. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported with citations; this requires a "References" section that lists these sources, complemented by inline citations where appropriate; (d) neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias; and (e) 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. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of— (a) a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; (b) appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents; and (c) consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using either footnotes (<ref>Smith 2007, p. 1.</ref>) or Harvard referencing (Smith 2007, p. 1)—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references; for articles with footnotes, the meta:cite format is recommended. Images. It has images that follow the image use policy and other media where appropriate, with succinct captions, brief and useful alt text when feasible, and acceptable copyright status. 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 (see 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.	Brazilian cruiser Bahia (as of November 2009)
A	The article is well-organized and essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject, like military history, or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class. More detailed criteria The article meets the A-Class criteria: Shortcuts: WP:ACLASS WP:A? Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:How to write a great article. 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, WikiProject Films).	Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting.	Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help.	Cologne War (as of October 2009)
GA	The article has attained good article status. More detailed criteria The article meets the good article criteria: Well-written: (a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation. Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout; (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources 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; and (c) it contains no original research. Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) 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.	Typhoon Elsie (1989) (as of November 2009)
B	The article is mostly complete and without major issues, 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 where necessary. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. The use of citation templates such as {{cite web}} is not required, but the use of <ref></ref> tags is encouraged. 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 certainly need not be "brilliant". The Manual of Style need not be followed rigorously. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible 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, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines.	KV55 (as of November 2009)
C	The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial cleanup. More detailed criteria The article is better developed in style, structure and quality than Start-Class, but 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.	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 address cleanup issues.	Architecture of Denmark (as of November 2009)
Start	An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources. More detailed criteria The article has a usable amount of good content but is weak in many areas, usually in referencing. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide enough sources to establish verifiability. No Start-Class article should be in any danger of being speedily deleted.	Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more.	Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation.	Real analysis (as of November 2006)
Stub	A very basic description of the topic. 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, but if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category.	Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition.	Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority.	Geodia gibberosa (as of July 2009)
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) In length and/or topic, it meets all of the requirements for stand-alone lists; it is not a content fork, does not largely recreate material from another article, and could not reasonably be included as part of a related article. Structure. It is easy to navigate through 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 it has a minimal proportion of red links. (b) Media files. It has images and other media, if appropriate to the topic, that follow Wikipedia's usage policies, with succinct captions and alternative (alt) text if necessary. 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.	Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 3) (as of February 2009)
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 aikidoka (as of June 2007)

[edit] Importance scale

The criteria used for rating article importance are meant to be an probable indication of how significant the topic is to a reader of literature, and how likely it would be covered in a serious encyclopedia. Hence, for example, Moby-Dick would be ranked higher than an average Anne Rice or Sidney Sheldon novel.

Note that general notability need not be from the perspective of editor demographics; generally notable topics should be rated similarly regardless of the country or region in which they hold said notability. Thus, topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.

Article importance grading scheme

Label	Criteria	Examples
Top	Subject is a "core" topic for literature.	Lolita The Lord of the Rings Pride and Prejudice War and Peace
High	Subject is very notable or significant within its field of literature.	The Name of the Rose Brighton Rock (novel) Lucky Jim
Mid	Subject is notable or significant within the field of literature (or to a historian), but not necessarily outside it.	Rosemary's Baby The Body in the Library
Low	Subject is not particularly notable or significant even within the field of literature, and may have been included primarily to achieve comprehensive coverage of a notable author or other notable subject.	Around The Moon A Fine Night for Dying The Holy

N.B. Discussion on which articles should be included in the "Top" priority class takes place here, Top priority.

[edit] Requesting an assessment

See the assessment request archive.

If you have made significant changes to an article and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below at the bottom of the list. If you are interested in more extensive comments on an article, please use the peer review department instead.

To assess an article, simply update the Novels WikiProject template on the article's talk page. Please also strike out the request on this page by using the <s>Strike-through text</s> command and add a rationale for your assessment. Don't forget to sign your username after your comment.

1. The Lightning Thief -- It's currently listed as stub-class and I think it's at least a start by now.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DreamHaze (talk • contribs)

   Yes, it's a start. —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 08:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

   I've been a bit more generous on the quality and put it up to "C". If you have any strong feelings on this just put it back down. However, I didn't think the general importance warranted a "High" although in Fantasy I have left it at High, but even then! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

   Not strongly, per say, but that tag at the top is rather scary for a C arrticle :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 09:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

2. The Host (novel) - It's currently listed as a start-class article, and I was wondering if you could reassess it to see if it's changed at all. What else should we work on? DreamHaze (talk) 04:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

   Kevin, I'll leave this one to you. It's at least a C, but are the "Background" and "Themes" section etc. enough for a B? (I'm so used to assessing for a MILHIST B... —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 04:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

   Bit borderline perhaps but yes I would think a B-class is warranted. In terms of where next there article still could do with a bit more real world material. Mostly perhaps in the realy of critical review and commercial reception, if there is material to support these. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 10:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

3. At Lady Molly's - Have done some work on this. The characters' sections are long but very hard to stop once I started. PatrickRowley(talk)

   Upped the class to a C as there is substantially more material here now - it could do with a few others sifting the material and providing more 3rd party citations etc. before it can move higher. Still, very promising improvements. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

4. The Faerie Wars Chronicles - C-class? Extremepro (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

   Can you give some idea what your issue is with the current C-Class rating. Too high - too low - any idea why? :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 11:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

5. Aunt Phillis's Cabin - I've done a great deal of work fixing up this article, which was previously catalogued as Stub-class. Could somebody please re-assess this article along with my edits, please? Crablogger (talk) 13:01, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

   I have assessed this as C-class although the article could well do with more notability and real-world material surrounding the reaction to the novel and critical comment. Contemporary with the novel or modern that is! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 14:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

6. The Cabin and Parlor; or, Slaves and Masters - This article has not yet been assessed for either importance or quality, and I was hoping someone might have a look at it. Crablogger (talk) 06:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

   I have assessed this as Start-class (although borderline C) as the article could well do with more notability and real-world material. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

7. A Memory of Light - Currently start class, done a lot of work on it, so should be worthy of a higher class. Rehevkor ✉ 04:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

   I realise now, since the split, the article is no longer about a single novel, but rather a volume of 3 collectively titled A Memory of Light. Perhaps this is not an appropriate project for this article? Rehevkor ✉ 23:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

   The split is currently still speculation, raise to C-class as there isn't much more that can reliably by said. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

8. The Dana Girls - This article is currently listed as a stub. I've added to this article quite a bit and think it's at least a Start-class now. Ricardiana (talk) 19:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

   Substantially enhanced - given C-class as this isprobably about the most that should be said about the series. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

9. The Saxon Shore - I have been doing substantial work developing this article, it should be close to C-class now, though I would like to know what would help. Thank You. SADADS (talk) 02:31, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

   Just about a C-class article as with most article the real world material should be worked up - emphasising notability; then references and in-line-citations should also be worked on. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

10. Traveller (novel) - Continuing on my impulse to update entries about obscure books about animals... I'm now working on Traveller. Is it ready to be start-class? Zekiw (talk) 02:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

    Bearly - this article is substantially just a list of "players". There is not even a plot summary or even an introduction. Also notability, real world reception, reviews, success etc should be added. With of course suitable referencing. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

    All the same, thanks! I'll be working on it some more of course, but I have this loony need to make sure that all of the articles I'm working on are at LEAST start-class.Zekiw (talk) 05:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

11. Welkin Weasels - I'm back to bother you some more. Working away at the entries for this series, with a little help. I also think the entry for the first book, Thunder Oak, is ready to be start-class. Zekiw (talk) 05:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

    Yes both are Start-class material - next look at real world issues and referencing. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 14:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

12. The Street Lawyer - I think it was rated a few months ago, and it's still on stub-class. I personally think it's better than that, but I'm sort of new-ish so I'm not sure. Help me! --Please don't look at my real username. I hate it. (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

    Raised to Start-class - however it is only just. Needs more real world material to give the article more to separate it from the crowd. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

13. Julie of the Wolves - I expanded it a bit a few months ago, but am still not sure if it warrants a class raise to C or not. :/ --SilentAria ^talk 09:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

    Easily a C-class. Critical review material might be nice to add more of. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 10:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

14. The Skystone - been working on building this up looks to be a C-class but I want someone other than myself to agree with me. SADADS (talk) 23:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

    I'm not about to reverse the class - but the article although long is almost entirely "in-universe" in character there should be both real world content and third party sources referenced. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

15. Exposure (novel) - Just created it but it is more than a stub. Extremepro (talk) 00:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

    Indeed - just about a C but more work to be done on real world issues. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

16. Bog Child - C-class because of real world reviews and awards? Extremepro (talk) 08:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

    the article is better, than a stub. Not sure if it is quite a C, maybe it should be re-assessed after someone cleans up the level of syntax and incorporates a few more features of a typical Novels article.SADADS (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

    Nevermind, its C. SADADS (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

17. His Family -- it was a stub before, but I think it should be higher now. This is my first novel article in years, though, so I'm not sure. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 05:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
18. Maniac Magee -- Started as a stub. I rewrote the summary and added on sections for major characters, critical reviews, use in education, etc. Added references. maniacmagee (talk) 10:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
19. The Man Who Fell in Love with the Moon - Major expansion, with inline cites and so on. Personally, I feel it's borderline C/B, but ranked it C temporarily. Less biased eyes than mine may make this decision about moving (or not) to B-class. - Tim1965 (talk) 01:10, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
20. Osiris Rising - I think this is probably closing in on C class, but I would like to know what someone else thinks.(It may be a start, but I think I have sourced everything that can be sourced and it covers all of the scholarship.SADADS (talk) 18:58, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
21. The Gathering Storm (novel) - Still a some work to do, but, B class? Rehevkor ✉ 23:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
22. The Faerie Wars Chronicles - real world info added. Extremepro (talk) 10:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
23. The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Alchemyst: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Magician: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Sorceress: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel, The Necromancer: The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel I've spent the last few days cleaning these articles up (and creating in the case of The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel series page) could you please give them a look over and see if they can be raised up from start & stub classifications please? Any advice is welcome :) Thank you in advance! Zephfya (talk) 13:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

[edit] Raw counts

All figures given for the end of each month

	Jun 2006		Jul 2006		Aug 2006		Sep 2006		Oct 2006		Nov 2006		Dec 2006		Jan 2007		Feb 2007		Mar 2007		Apr 2007		Feb 2009
FA	8	0.37 %	8	0.29 %	7	0.20 %	6	0.14 %	6	0.11 %	7	0.12 %	7	0.10 %	9	0.11 %	10	0.11 %	10	0.10 %	10	0.09 %	21	0.0009 %
A	0	0.00 %	0	0.00 %	2	0.06 %	4	0.10 %	4	0.07 %	4	0.07 %	6	0.10 %	5	0.06 %	4	0.04 %	4	0.04 %	4	0.03 %	1	~0 %
GA	0	0.00 %	3	0.11 %	8	0.23 %	7	0.17 %	8	0.15 %	8	0.14 %	8	0.11 %	7	0.08 %	10	0.11 %	10	0.10 %	10	0.09 %	60	.0028 %
B	7	0.32 %	82	2.96 %	170	4.81 %	313	7.50 %	398	7.44 %	472	8.19 %	559	7.67 %	718	8.59 %	768	8.54 %	779	7.57 %	810	7.00 %	946	.0437 %
C	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	246	.0114 %
Start	32	1.46 %	256	9.24 %	416	11.78 %	712	9.97 %	1011	18.91 %	1190	20.66 %	1499	20.57 %	2167	25.92 %	2474	27.50 %	2558	24.86 %	2868	24.79 %	4679	21.61 %
Stub	24	1.10 %	353	12.74 %	540	15.29 %	1022	24.50 %	1771	33.12 %	2238	38.85 %	3455	47.41 %	4799	57.41 %	5724	63.64 %	6920	67.24 %	7453	64.42 %	15589	71.99 %
Unassessed	2114	96:75 %	2069	74:76 %	2388	67.63 %	2108	50.53 %	2049	38.32 %	1842	31.97 %	1753	24.06 %	654	7.82 %	5	0.05 %	9	0.09 %	415	3.59 %	0	0 %
Top	0		19	0.69 %	51	1.44 %	69	2.40 %	73	1.37 %	73	1.27 %	76	1.04 %	81	0.97 %	89	0.99 %	87	0.85 %	90	0.78 %	109	.0050 %
High	0		105	3.79 %	170	4.81 %	417	10.00 %	551	10.30 %	601	10.43 %	652	8.95 %	712	8.52 %	747	8.30 %	756	7.35 %	777	6.72 %	839	.0387 %
Mid	0		359	12.96 %	598	16.94 %	1077	25.81 %	1517	28.37 %	2060	35.76 %	3070	42.13 %	4634	55.44 %	5349	59.47 %	5609	54.51 %	6149	53.15 %	8092	37.37 %
Low	0		172	6.21 %	271	7.67 %	440	10.55 %	1000	18.70 %	1181	20.50 %	1734	23.80 %	2272	27.18 %	2802	31.15 %	3413	33.17 %	4132	35.71 %	11224	51.83 %
Total	2185		2771		3531		4172		5347		5761		7287		8359		8995		10290		11570		21654

[edit] Monthly changes

Percent change is given relative to the prior count in each class.

	Jul 2006		Aug 2006		Sep 2006		Oct 2006		Nov 2006		Dec 2006		Jan 2007		Feb 2007		Mar 2007		Apr 2007		May 2007 (tba)
FA	+0	0.00 %	-1	-12.50 %	-1	-14.29 %	0	0.00 %	+1	16.67 %	0	0.00 %	+2	28.57 %	+1	11.11 %	0	0.00 %	0	00.00 %
A	+0		+2		+2	100.00 %	0	0.00 %	0	0.00 %	+2	50.00 %	-1	-16.67 %	-1	-20.00 %	0	0.00 %	0	00.00 %
GA	+ 3		+5	166.67 %	-1	-12.50 %	+1	14.29 %	0	0.00 %	0	0.00 %	-1	-12.50 %	+3	42.86 %	0	0.00 %	0	00.00 %
B	+75	1071.43 %	+88	107.32 %	+143	84.12 %	+85	27.16 %	+74	18.59 %	+78	16.53 %	+159	28.44 %	+50	6.96 %	+11	1.43 %	+31	3.98 %
Start	+224	700.00 %	+160	62.50 %	+296	71.15 %	+299	41.99 %	+179	17.71 %	+309	25.97 %	+668	44.56 %	+307	14.17 %	+84	3.40 %	+310	12.19 %
Stub	+329	1370.83 %	+187	52.97 %	+482	89.26 %	+749	73.29 %	+467	26.37 %	+1217	54.38 %	+1344	38.90 %	+925	19.27 %	+1196	20.89 %	+533	07.70 %
Unassessed	-45	-2.13 %	+319	15.42 %	-280	-11.73 %	-59	-2.80 %	-207	-10.10 %	-89	-4.83 %	-1099	-62.69 %	-649	-99.24 %	+4	80.00 %	+406	4511.11 %
Top	+19		+32	168.42 %	+18	35.29 %	+4	5.80 %	0	0.00 %	+3	4.11 %	+5	6.58 %	+8	9.88 %	-2	-2.25 %	+3	3.45 %
High	+105		+65	61.90 %	+247	145.29 %	+134	32.13 %	+50	9.07 %	+51	4.89 %	+60	9.20 %	+35	4.92 %	+9	1.20 %	+21	2.81 %
Mid	+359		+239	66.57 %	+479	80.10 %	+440	40.85 %	+543	35.79 %	+1010	49.03 %	+1564	50.94 %	+715	15.43 %	+260	4.86 %	+540	9.63 %
Low	+172		+99	57.56 %	+169	62.36 %	+560	127.27 %	+181	18.10 %	+553	46.82 %	+538	31.03 %	+530	23.33 %	+611	5.84 %	+719	21.07 %
Total	+586	+26.82 %	+760	+27.43 %	+641	+18.15 %	+1175	+28.16 %	+404	+3.57 %	+1526	+26.49 %	+1072	+14.71 %	+636	+07.61 %	+1295	+14.40 %	+1280	+12.44 %

[edit] Log

The full log of assessment changes for the past thirty days is available; due to its size (ca 100 kB), it cannot be transcluded directly.