To classify an article, place the template {{
maths rating}} on the article's talk page. Anyone can add a maths rating or change an existing rating. The template can be used to assess the importance (or priority) and quality (or class grading) of the article using the importance and class parameters respectively. Specifying these parameters will place the article in the appropriate subcategory of
Category:Mathematics articles by priority and
Category:Mathematics articles by quality. There is also a field parameter to define the subject area of the article.
The full syntax of the maths rating template is:
{{maths rating
|small=
|class=
|priority=
|field=
|historical=
|vital=
|portal=
|frequentlyviewed= (not for manual use, see below)
|ACD=
}}
small=yes can be used when a page has lots of templates, producing a more compact version. Any other value for small parameter is ignored, and the standard template results.
The synonym importance is also available for the priority parameter; it is identical except that where the template displays importance instead of priority in the places priority is displayed when priority is used.
general (information about mathematics not related to a particular field)
basics (elementary material and terms used throughout mathematics)
analysis
algebra
geometry
applied
probability and statistics
number theory
discrete
foundations (logic and set theory)
mathematical physics
topology
history (see the "historical" parameter below)
mathematicians
the historical parameter, if nonempty, places the article in
Category:History of subject mathematics articles. It is recommended to use this parameter instead of the history field. In particular, this allows a historical article to be assigned another field.
the ACD parameter, if nonempty, places a notice that the article has been nominated for the
A-class quality rating.
the frequentlyviewed parameter is used to mark the 500 most frequently viewed articles, based on
collected data. This marking is done via a bot, and the frequentlyviewed parameter should not be added manually.
Comments may be left in the /Comments subpage of the article talk page (for example,
Talk:Riemann hypothesis/Comments). These brief comments usually contain suggestions on how the article could be improved to bring it up to the next grade. It is helpful to at least put ~~~~ as a comment, so that the date of the rating can easily be seen. Comments may be viewed and edited by following the "Comments" link on the template.