User:Vassyana/insanity/Notability 001

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Changes made in sandbox.

This page in a nutshell: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable.

Notability
Inclusion guidelines
Academics Books Films Music Numbers Organizations & companies People Web content
Active proposals
Aircraft Criminal acts Fiction Places and transportation Schools Serial works Streets and roads Toys and games
See also
Common deletion outcomes

Within Wikipedia, notability is an inclusion criterion based on encyclopedic suitability of a topic for a Wikipedia article. This concept is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity", although these may correlate with notability. If an article currently does not cite reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, that does not necessarily mean the topic is not notable. However, notability is based upon the reasonable presumption that enough sources exist to craft a complete article. Notability only pertains to the suitability of topics for articles but does not affect article content.

Contents 1 General notability guideline 2 Notability requires objective evidence 3 Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines 4 Notability is not temporary 5 Notability does not limit article content 6 See also 7 Notes

[edit] General notability guideline

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable.

• A subject that is presumed to be notable may still not be worthy of inclusion if it fails What Wikipedia is not.

• Not all coverage in reliable sources constitutes evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation; for example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories are all examples of coverage that may not support notability.

• Sources must address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content.

• Availability of independent sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.

• Self-promotion, autobiography, and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article. The published works should be someone else writing independently about the topic. Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large.

• Enough sources should exist in order to guarantee a neutral article can be written.

[edit] Notability requires objective evidence

Notability requires verifiable objective evidence to support a disputed claim of notability. Substantial coverage in reliable, independent sources is the principal form of such evidence. Wikipedia is not a news source: it takes more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic to constitute evidence of sufficient notability. The Wikimedia project Wikinews covers topics of present news coverage.

[edit] Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines

If an article fails to demonstrate the notability of its subject, look for sources yourself, or:

• Ask the article's creator for sources.
• Put the {{notability}} tag on the article to alert other editors.
• Use the {{expert-subject}} tag with a specific WikiProject to attract editors knowledgeable about that field.

If appropriate sources cannot be found, consider merging the article's content into a broader article providing context. Otherwise:

• If the article meets our criteria for speedy deletion, one can use a deletion tag listed on that page.
• Use the {{prod}} tag for articles that do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, but are uncontroversial deletion candidates. This allows the article to be deleted after five days if nobody objects.
• Otherwise, or if unsure, nominate the article for the deletion, where consensus can be reached regarding deletion.

[edit] Notability is not temporary

Shortcuts: WP:N#TEMP WP:NTEMP

Clearly established notability does not expire, but substantial coverage over a period of time is still required. Also, articles should not be written based on speculation that the topic may receive additional coverage in the future, as we only consider existing reliable sources.

[edit] Notability does not limit article content

Shortcuts: WP:NNC WP:N#NCONTENT

Notability guidelines give guidance on whether a topic is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia as a separate article, but do not specifically regulate the content of articles. Individual facts and subtopics within an article are governed by content policy, not notability.

[edit] See also

v • d • e Key Wikipedia policies and guidelines Overview Policies and guidelines (WP:POL) · List of policies (WP:LOP) · List of guidelines (WP:LGL) Global principles What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT) · Ignore all rules (WP:IAR, WP:IGNORE) Article standards policies Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV) · Verifiability (WP:V) · No original research (WP:NOR) · Living persons' biographies (WP:BLP) · Deletion policy (WP:DEL) Behavioral policies Assume good faith (WP:AGF) · Civility (WP:CIV, WP:CIVIL) · No personal attacks (WP:NPA) · No legal threats (WP:NLT · WP:LEGAL) · Ownership of articles (WP:OWN) · Three-revert rule (WP:3RR) · Sock-puppetry (WP:SOCK) Behavioral guidelines Etiquette (WP:EQ) · Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point (WP:POINT) · Don't bite the newcomers (WP:BITE) · Don't game the system (WP:GAME) Resolution policies Consensus (WP:CON) · Resolving disputes (WP:DR) Classification guidelines Subpages (WP:SP) · Cats, lists, navboxes (WP:CLN) · Lists (WP:L) · Categories (WP:CAT) · Templates (WP:TMP) Content guidelines Conflict of interest (WP:COI) · Don't copy sources (WP:NPS) · Disambiguation (WP:D) · Don't create hoaxes (WP:HOAX) · Notability (WP:N) · Wikipedia:Patent nonsense (WP:PN) Editing guidelines Be bold (WP:BOLD) · Edit summary (WP:ES) · Sign on talk pages (WP:SIG) · Talk page guidelines (WP:TALK) · User page guidelines (WP:USER) Style conventions Article size (WP:SIZE) · Build the web (WP:BTW) · Manual of Style (WP:MOS · WP:STYLE) · Naming conventions (WP:NC)

Essays related to notability:

• Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions - An essay arguing against the use of subjective criteria such as "I like it" and "I don't like it."
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes - Summary of common outcomes from AfD discussions giving context to precedents.
• Wikipedia:Independent sources - An essay explaining further why independent sources are needed to write an encyclopedia article.
• Wikipedia:Notability/Arguments - A list of arguments for both application and non-application of notability.
  • User:Uncle G/On notability - An argument in favor of specific notability criteria.
  • Wikipedia:Non-notability/Essay - A dissenting view to notability arguments.
  • User:Hiding/What notability is not - An essay on notability within Wikipedia.
  • Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not/Unencyclopedic A 2003 discussion on the use of "unencyclopedic" as a term in deletion debates
  • Wikipedia:Inherent notability - An essay arguing that certain topics have inherent notability.
• Wikiprojects are encouraged to write essays that contain advice and/or opinions on how they interpret notability within their area of expertise. Such essays are not policies or guidelines, and editors are free to, but not obliged to follow their guidance. A list of such essays can be found in the WikiProject notability essays category.

[edit] Notes