I'm not sure what automated assessment means. Does that mean adding a grammar and spelling checker to the Mediawiki software? The way to assess articles could be spelled out somewhere. The consensus I've experienced is to not create an article unless it is already like a term paper that would get an "A." From my experience, working on what somebody else wrote is automaticlly criticized, although the written policies seem to encourage people to work on the articles. Thousands of edits per article does make it difficult to see what the history of the article is. Also, a college professor who teaches the subject would be able to assess the quality of the articles content, and general readers are able to assess understandability of the article. I suppose the comments page is there to help in article assessment. The question is, who is there to listen to that assessment if the article has no particular author, and people are not told to to assess the artcle rather than chat on the subject or the editors. --Chuck Marean 02:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
My understanding is that automated assessment more relates to the typical article assessment standards (for instance, check out w:Wikipedia:Assessment for the English Wikipedia's version).