User:LaughingVulcan/sandbox/3rd Essay WIP - I'm Notable, Dammit!

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Essay WIP - I'm Notable, Dammit!

---

Please realize that this is an Essay. It is not policy, nor a guideline. However, if you were referred here from an Articles for Deletion discussion, the referring Editor may feel that your sense of notability about the article does not seem to match the Notability Guidelines for Wikipedia, or one of the sub-guidelines for notability. Please take a deep breath and relax. This page may or may not apply to your situation. Consider the following:

• About 5,000 articles are deleted at Wikipedia per day.
• 100 plus articles have deletion discussions started about them at Wikipedia per day.
• Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, but it also has official policies and other guidelines about what can and cannot remain at Wikipedia.

Notability means that something is worthy of notice. Everybody and everything is notable to somebody. Many people and things are notable to many. However, Wikipedia does not and will not have articles about everybody and everything.

We determine the difference at Wikipedia by using the notability guideline and the subguidelines for specific fields: academics, people in general, books, fiction, films, music, organizations and companies, pornographic actors, and web content. Other guidelines may be in development.

Many of the people who participate at Articles for Deletion do so regularly. The same types of argument come up many, many times. Sometimes they come up many times a day. Many unsuccessful argument types are found at arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. This essay limits itself to frequent arguments used in notability claims.

The following types of arguments absolutely will not help you on their own to retain the article:

• This is "MY" article.

The article may be about you, or something close to you, or you may have created it. However, nobody owns any page at Wikipedia (even "your" User pages.) If you want to know more about this, read WP:OWN. If you are believing that you have the automatic right to your article, you may wish to read What Wikipedia Is Not, as many related beliefs in this sphere are listed there.

• "I know him/her/it, and he/she/it is notable!"

You know the subject of the article. Great! That isn't sarcasm - you obviously feel passionate about the subject or person, and that is normally a good thing. However, there are accepted guidelines about how Wikipedia evaluates notability, and this reasoning will not automatically fit any of them. At this point, you have to show why it is notable by Wikipedia's guidelines.

• "You should change this whole Notability thing!"

Perhaps you are right. However, there are processes for arriving at consensus decisions to change notability standards. You will not be able to change the guidelines by arguing about them in the deletion discussion. It does not matter how passionately, logically, or angrily you make your points. If you really want to argue the standards, go to the Talk page of the guideline and make your case. But do not think that you can do so on the deletion discussion and see the article kept.

• "He/she/it is cool!"

Good. Cool things are cool. But is it notable?

• "He/she/it is popular!"

Popularity is important, and notable things are often popular. However, notability and popularity are not the same thing. If something is truly popular, it should be able to meet the relevant notability guidelines being cited. You would be far closer to making the case if you find the independent, verifiable, reliable sources written about the subject, citing them in the article, then noting that in the AfD.

• "I'm going to get all my friends to come over to the AfD page and say how notable it is! That'll change their minds!"

Shocking secret: At one time, the sheer vote count of Keep versus Delete did matter. The process used to be called Votes for Deletion. That system has since been deprecated. Occasionally you'll see someone use the term, "!vote." Humorously or seriously, it literally means, "Not Vote," and recognizes AfD is not a vote.

Now, it doesn't matter if you got one hundred people to write a Keep opinion. In fact, if this is suspected the discussion will be tagged with a template warning all readers that canvassing may be going on to sway discussion, and warning editors coming from outside Wikipedia that this is not a vote.

What matters, especially for Notability, is that the article can show that it meets notability guidelines. It's really that simple.

• "Wikipedia is prejudiced against [free software] [indie/local musical artists] [self-published authors] [etc.] ..."

You may be right. Since Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources which can be verified, there is a degree of prejudice against some types of subjects. Until those standards are changed, though, it's not going to change whether the article you are passionate about will be kept or deleted. And that is a different process from the deletion discussion at hand. If you don't understand exactly why it seems the article was nominated for deletion, ask about it on the deletion page. Usually one (or more) Editors will point you at the policy or guideline which explains it.

• "Wikipedia has articles about stuff way less important than [article subject]."

Yes, there are things that you may feel are less important than the subject of your passions. Those things may even be objectively less notable or important than your subject. However, it is this article that is under consideration for notability, not those things. For more information, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, or WP:FISHING.'

• "This is violating my constitutional 1st Amendment Right!" or "I have free speech!"

In a nutshell, no. Wikipedia is not a Governmental entity, and it is not a public institution. It is a privately owned and maintained website. This argument has no merit here whatsoever, no matter how strongly you feel it does.

• "I'm notable, Dammit!"

As mentioned in the introduction, everyone and everything is notable to someone. It is good that you know that the article subject is notable (even if it is you.) However, the reason this article is at Articles for Deletion is that somebody is questioning if the subject's notability meets or exceeds the guidelines of Wikipedia's notability criteria. At this point, it is rare that assertion alone will work. PLEASE read WP:N, and/or any other notability criteria that have been cited to you or that you feel may be relevant. Almost all of them center around finding reliable sources that are verifiable and citing them appropriately in the article. Before assuming that your sources are reliable and verifiable, please check that they meet the threshhold for what Wikipedia considers reliable and verifiable, at WP:RS and WP:V. If you are unsure, you may raise the source on the Article Talk page and/or the deletion discussion to find out what other Editors think.

There may be many reasons that you have been referred here. This essay was originally written to help you understand that there may be differences between what you consider "notability" to be and what Wikipedia has already determined notability is to include in the encyclopedia. Don't let the questioning of notability reflect on your own sense of personal notability. Just work through the process, and see if you can help meet the notability guidelines or not. Remember, a deleted article may only mean that you haven't reached Wikipedia's notability guidelines yet. It doens't mean that the subject will never be on Wikipedia.

Good luck!