Misplaced Pages

:Notability (fiction): Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:26, 3 June 2008 editGavin.collins (talk | contribs)18,503 edits Move sentence from WP:FICT#Elements of Fiction to WP:FICT#Dealing with non-notable fictional topics per WT:FICT#Duplication of guidance on article deletion← Previous edit Revision as of 03:23, 8 January 2009 edit undoJinnai (talk | contribs)21,453 edits added a line due to the recent King Triton conteiversyNext edit →
(339 intermediate revisions by 50 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{proposed}} {{proposed|WP:FICT}}
{{pp-semi-vandalism|small=yes}}
<!-- {{Misplaced Pages subcat guideline|notability guideline|Fiction|]<br />]}} --> <!-- {{Misplaced Pages subcat guideline|notability guideline|Fiction|]<br />]}} -->
{{nutshell {{nutshell
|Some fictional elements may not meet the ] but may still be covered in a standalone article. Those elements must be part of a significant and notable work of fiction, be important to covering that work in an encyclopedic fashion, and must have sufficient ] to allow for an article to be written in a ].}}
|Articles on a work of fiction or fictional element(s) should demonstrate real-world ] from ]. Non-notable elements should preferably be concisely covered within articles on the main work or on notable elements. Coverage of fictional elements should focus on the demonstrated notability for the topic, with an appropriate ] of ]}}
:''For information about writing articles on fiction, refer to ].'' {{For|information about writing articles on fiction|Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)}}
{{For|the previous version of this page|Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction)/2008 proposal}}
{{For|specific examples where you may be able to help|Misplaced Pages:Fiction/Noticeboard}} {{For|specific examples where you may be able to help|Misplaced Pages:Fiction/Noticeboard}}
{{IncGuide}} {{IncGuide}}


'''Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction)''' covers the general ] of ] including individual episodes of serialized works such as television or comic book series, as well as ] such as characters, items and places within a work of fiction. For more specific notability guidelines on works of fiction presented in specific forms of media, see the following guidelines: '''Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction)''' is a '''proposed''' guideline that defines the inclusion criteria for elements of ], including individual and serialized works (such as television episodes or comic book series), as well the elements wholly within the fictionalized world (such as characters or settings). Works of fiction distributed through the media of books and film are also (but not exclusively) the subject of separate notability guidelines for ] and ] respectively. Inclusion criteria for lists are dealt with at ].
*] for books
*] for films
*] for web-based content
*'']'' proposed guideline for toys and games (including both role-playing games and video games)


In all cases, if a subject relating to a work or element of fiction meets the requirement of the ], it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. Elements of a notable work of fiction are presumed to be notable if they meet a simple test. The work should be important or significant, the fictional element itself should be important to an encyclopedic understanding of the work, and verifiable information must exist about the subject apart from a plot summary. When assessing a topic's notability, Wikipedians should remember that this and all notability guidelines judge a subject on the basis of currently available sources, not sources present in the article itself, which is not a ]. Editors should assume ] for all articles they come across and if they believe that the article does not meet Misplaced Pages standards they should try to improve it or merge it into a section in a larger article before deleting it entirely.
==Defining notability for fiction==
This guideline is based on three excerpts:


==Three-pronged test for notability==
From ]:
Per the ], a topic is presumed notable for a standalone article if it is the subject of non-trivial coverage by reliable and independent sources. Some articles on fictional subjects, however, may not meet the general notability guideline. For these articles, a fictional element of a ''notable work'' should meet three conditions:
<blockquote>Misplaced Pages articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development and historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies to both stand-alone works and series. A concise plot summary is appropriate as part of the larger coverage of a fictional work.</blockquote>
*'''Importance of the fictional work''': Fictional universes that are considered more culturally or historically significant are more likely to have coverage in reliable sources, and may go into greater depth than a short-form critical review of the work. If those sources present clear claims for the artistic or cultural importance of the fictional work beyond basic notability, it is a good sign that some individual elements of the work may be notable.
*'''Importance within the fictional work''': The subject should be an episode or non-cameo character that is important or central to understanding the work as a whole. Assessing the importance involves researching commentary from ] on the topic. The work itself can also indicate importance to some extent, but avoid ] or comparisons. Focus on indisputable facts (e.g. "the character appears in every episode") to prove importance, rather than personal opinion. Understanding the overall work does not require exhaustive detail, but may require articles on specific elements that are necessary to explain the work's overall plot and impact.
*'''Real-world coverage''': Significant ] must exist on the subject's development and reception beyond what is revealed in the plot of the fictional work. Examples of development information include creative influences and design processes, while examples of reception information include critical, commercial, or cultural impact. Sometimes this real-world perspective can be established through the use of sources with a connection to the creators of the fictional work, such as developer commentary. Merely listing the notable works where the fictional element appears, their respective release dates, and the names of the production staff is not sufficient. An article with a verifiable real-world perspective that establishes real-world ] will rarely be deleted.


A subject that meets all three of the above criteria may qualify for a standalone article. An article is ], and a subject can still be notable based on the reasonable belief that adequate evidence of notability exists. But there must be a reasonable belief that evidence exists for all ''three'' criteria.
From ]:
<blockquote>A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in ] that are ] of the subject.</blockquote>


This test does not supersede Misplaced Pages's content and inclusion policies such as those on ] and ]. Editors may consider whether the fictional subject could be treated as a section or part of a parent article or list instead of a standalone article, but notability guidelines do ]. No part of this guideline is meant to preempt the editorial decision of content selection and presentation.
From ]:
<blockquote>Whatever you do, endeavour to preserve information. Instead of deleting: try to rephrase;
correct the inaccuracy while keeping the content; move text within an article or to another article (existing or new); add more of what you think is important to make an article more balanced; or request a citation by adding the {{tl|fact}} tag. Exceptions include: duplication or redundancy; irrelevancy; ]; ]; or ] (attempt to correct the misinformation or discuss the problems first before deletion).</blockquote>


==Sources and notability==
For articles on fiction, '']'' may cover such things as design, development, reception and cultural impact. This is ''real-world coverage'' because it describes the real-world aspects of the work. ''Fictional coverage'' describes the work's fictional elements, such as the setting, characters, and story.


All articles must meet Misplaced Pages's policy on ], where every statement is backed by research from ]. However, a verifiable article is not necessarily notable by Misplaced Pages's standards and merely being verifiable does ]; the ] requires the use of reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. For fictional subjects, terms such as ''reliability'' and ''independence'' have specialized meanings.
Based on this reasoning and the above excerpts, fictional concepts can be presumed '''notable''' if they have ''received significant real-world coverage in ] sources that are independent of the subject''. However, notability for individual topics on fiction should be judged on a case-by-case basis while following Misplaced Pages's core policies of ], ] and ].


===Reliability===
==Demonstrating notability==
===Works of fiction===
Articles on a work of fiction (a book, movie, television series, video game, or other medium) should demonstrate notability by citing critical reception, viewings or sales figures, development and other information from reliable sources. Such sources can include creators' commentary and interviews regarding the work or topic, bearing in mind the restrictions if the work is ]. Although data such as cast and crew members, publication or airing dates and length of work can be taken from reliable sources, such information may ''not'' demonstrate notability.


A notable fictional element will have real-world information about its development or reception. Reception, reviews, and criticism must be verified in reliable sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. News organizations and scholarly journals usually ensure reliability through peer review. However, a source may still be considered reliable without these strict content controls. Wikipedians can determine whether a source meets our guideline on reliable sources through consensus. These discussions usually take place at the ], or at specific ].
Certain media have additional notability guidelines: ] for books and printed material, ] for films, and ] for toys, traditional games, and video games. A work of fiction is presumed to be notable if it meets the general notability guideline, the guidelines presented here, or the guidelines specific to its medium.


===Elements of fiction=== ===Independence===
Elements of a work of fiction, including individual stories, episodes, characters, settings, and other topics, are presumed to be notable if there is significant coverage of the element(s) in reliable secondary sources. For fictional elements, this will typically include the real-world context and analysis of the elements, and can include influence and other aspects of its development, critical reception of the elements, and popularity of the element through readership/viewership ratings and marketing. Notability of an element may also be shown through secondary-source analysis of the main work of fiction, citing the importance of the element to the work. Reputable academic studies of individual elements may also demonstrate notability.


Coverage of fiction often benefits from relying on sources that do not meet the strictest standards of independence. Because control over intellectual property is often jealously guarded, much of the background information about fictional subject may come from copyright holders. The idea of an "independent source" was developed to deal with press releases, corporate websites, and self promotion&mdash;issues that are less likely to crop up with fictional subjects than ] or ]. However, some care must be taken to ensure that the distribution of fictional articles avoids ] and adheres to a ].
Data such as actors, cast and crew, publication and airing dates, appearances in a larger body of works, and production codes, while useful and sometimes necessary data for articles on fictional elements, are ''not'' sufficient for notability as these are trivial data that can be learned for any other work in the same medium by reviewing the original work or through sites and resources such as ] or ]. Evidence of notability should explain what is special about the topic, such as awards, rankings, sales figures or studies and analyses specifically relating to the element in question.<ref>An example of a plaudit given for fictional elements that speaks directly to notability is ], selected by a respected body on the basis of clear criteria; fan polls will not generally indicate notability, although coverage of the poll result in media or academic sources may do so.</ref><ref>It is not generally a sufficient indicator of notability for an award to be given for a fictional topic, or for a fictional work to have high figures according to primary sources; however, these are often discussed in secondary coverage which, if significant, may be used to establish the notability of the fictional topic in question. In some cases, however, a plaudit is of sufficient stature to represent sufficient coverage in itself; it is rare that such will have been given without coverage in other secondary sources, and exceptional evidence will be required to justify any element as notable on the basis of an award alone. </ref> Notability, in accordance with this guidance, is best demonstrated through citations to reliable secondary sources.


As a result, elements of the three-prong test may be satisfied through the use of non-promotional sources that may or may not be independent from the content creators. These are independent in the sense that they make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, and/or evaluative claims about the subject. These may include ] such as author or developer commentary which provide significant real-world content about the subject that goes beyond what is revealed in the plot of the fictional work.
Notability may be shown for an individual element<ref>For example ], ], ], ] and '']''</ref> or for a certain grouping of elements, commonly characters or episodes.<ref>For example ] or ]</ref> When notability can be shown, the element or grouping of elements merits a separate article. This article should be summarized in the parent article, and {{tl|main}} or {{tl|see also}} templates should be used to direct users to where they may find more information.<ref>For example, an overview of ] is provided by the "Cast" section of ], while a brief summary of ] is included in ] to compare with other listed characters</ref> Further details can be found in the ] section of ].


===Secondary sources are necessary for notability===
However, even where an element or group of elements is notable, it may be more appropriate to include the information in an article on the work itself if:
{{Further|]}}
*The resulting article would be very short, with little or no likelihood of expansion.
A topic about which there are no significant secondary sources cannot pass this guideline. Primary sources, such as the fictional work itself, can be used to ] certain facts about the fictional work, and can contribute towards the second prong of the three-prong test. However, since they offer no real-world perspectives, they cannot provide any information on the first or third prongs, and thus are not enough to establish notability.
*The resulting article would have, by necessity, excessive ].


] and original analysis of primary sources (for example, by speculating about what a scene might imply, or by making detailed comparisons between scenes) should be avoided. Plot summary may be used to a limited extent as described by our ], but an article written entirely from primary sources is a warning sign that the subject might not meet the three-pronged test above.
===Fictional elements as part of a larger topic===
If consensus on a fictional element is that it is of unproven notability, editors should seek to retain the information where it can improve the encyclopedia. Such coverage may be placed as part of the main article on the work of fiction, or if better suited, an article on another, notable fictional element. If this makes the main article too long, per ], then there are several steps to consider:
* Merge coverage of less-notable elements to into a ] as ].
* Trim away material to reduce the size of the article. The approach to covering non-notable fictional elements is more fully described in ], but in general, non-notable fictional elements should only be given sufficient information for the reader to understand its relationship with the entire work.
* Transwiki excess material to a GFDL-compatible wiki. It is still appropriate to leave some mention of non-notable elements within the Misplaced Pages article, while linking to the other wiki for more details.
* Remove material that may be of trivial or of only highly detailed interest to the general reader. Characters that appear only once in a work and have minimal influence on the work need not be listed, though again, they can be covered in a off-site wiki and linked to.

Where none of the above steps can resolve the length problem without damaging encyclopedic coverage of the work, groupings of individually non-notable elements can merit their own supporting articles; this should be considered only for highly notable works,<ref name="highly">Highly notable works are taken as those that substantially exceed the minimum standards for notability, having large coverage in secondary sources. This would typically include those that have been the subject of extensive academic analysis.</ref> and the information within the supporting articles should not exceed the necessary ] for the main article's topic. Under current practice, these supporting articles are generally one of the following two types of list:
* Lists of characters in a highly-notable work or series of works.
* Lists of episodes or serial elements in a serial work.
If the resulting list would be too large without exceeding the necessary depth of coverage, elements may be grouped into smaller lists. To avoid undue weight on a subtopic, the smaller lists should correspond to either highly notable<ref name="highly"/> fictional subtopics or divisions of the work, or a real-world division.<ref>Regardless of how the split is broken up, the list article title should clearly indicate the work of fiction as part of the title; 'List of Jedi characters' would not be an appropriate title, but 'List of Jedi characters from Star Wars' would be.</ref> Lists of elements corresponding to a less-notable topic could still appear as sections in an article on that topic. For divisions by fictional characteristics, consider the use of categories to categorise redirects to individual list elements.

Subject-specific guidelines may limit these cases, or give other cases when such articles are considered appropriate. Articles that fail to meet these requirements can have their inclusion challenged through a deletion debate and are often deleted through editorial consensus. Articles that fail to meet the guidelines presented in ] can also be challenged and deleted or improved to meet our style.

==Depth of coverage==
Articles on fiction should be structured around evaluations and critiques of the work or topic, with an appropriate ] of real-world and plot information, as outlined at ]. The size of a plot summary is often determined by building consensus for each article on a case by case basis. Editors should compare approaches taken on ] and ] about fiction for examples of length and tone.

'''Depth of coverage within an article should be guided by the amount of real-world information which can be sourced.''' A single movie, book, video game, or other work of fiction has most likely not generated substantial<ref>This guideline does not offer ] for how much coverage qualifies as "substantial". We cannot rule on every instance, and there is a vast difference between the coverage the ] books have received and the coverage '']'' has received, with many falling into a grey area left to editorial consensus. Where disputes cannot be resolved, please list them at various venues to encourage wider participation and the building of consensus. ] is one such venue.</ref> coverage in sources which Misplaced Pages can summarize. Therefore, the article will be able to summarize those sources in one article. On the other hand, a series of books, television shows, or video games could contain elements which are better covered in a separate article or articles, helping to provide suitable background and supplementary information for each work within the series. See ] above for more details.

At times, better depth of coverage may be accomplished by combining notable and non-notable elements into a single topic, such as a character cast or a single season of a television show, instead of individual elements. WikiProjects that deal with fiction have guidelines describing what depth of coverage should be provided for plot information relative to the length of the original work. The complexity of the work should also be taken into a consideration; uses of certain creative elements (such as ] or ]s) may require more detail to clearly explain the concepts in an encyclopedic manner.

If there is an imbalance of fictional information in an article, consider trimming the text or ] to an appropriate GFDL-compatible Wiki.

==Dealing with non-notable fictional topics==
Editors may request evidence of the notability of any article, including those on fictional elements, either through in discussion on the article talk page or by the addition of a {{tl|notability}} template on the article itself. Articles on fictional topics that lack demonstrated notability should be improved either by adding demonstrated notability, or by other editing actions such as trimming, merging, or moving content to another Wiki.

Nevertheless, the lack of demonstrated notability is ''not'' one of the ], and ] improvements are expected as part of the ]. Editors should review specific guidelines or approaches outlined in the appropriate ], such as ] or ]. Other concerns about dealing with fictional notability can be raised at the ].

First and foremost, if you can provide reliably sourced, verifiable information on real-world facts that establish the notability of the topic, be ] and include it in the article. Here are additional suggestions to improve articles that lack demonstration of notability:

* If you believe the article will never have a chance of demonstrating notability or cannot be merged elsewhere, '''and''' that its deletion is unlikely to be contested, place the article up for ]. A character in a TV show that only appeared on-screen for a few seconds and is never referred to otherwise is probably non-notable; however, by using the proposed deletion process, someone may be able to provide the required evidence of notability. If you are unsure if this is the correct step, then do '''not''' perform this step.
* Inform the editors of the article on the article's talk page of your concern about the lack of notability. This can also be done by tagging the article with the {{tl|notability}} tag on the article page, though it is recommended to discuss your concerns with the editors as well in this case. If many such articles within the same fictional universe exist in a similar state, attempt to find a project or task force page for that fictional work and let the editors there know your concerns.
* If the article can be grouped with an existing article or other articles on the same type of fictional elements, then it may be appropriate to discuss a potential ]. This may require that information be trimmed from the article. If articles are merged, leave ] in their place to the appropriate page, and link the old article or articles in your edit summary to comply with the GFDL. Consider using ] to help track such redirects. You can boldly merge articles, but consensus will often be required before major changes are accepted by the community.
* If an existing GFDL-compatible wiki for the fictional topic exists, suggest transwiki'ing the information. Again, articles that are moved should be replaced with redirection pages.
* If the above options have been considered and determined to not be possible or if you feel that any action taken has not remedied the situation, it may be appropriate to nominate the ] where the merits of the article can be debated. However, this should be considered carefully for an article that otherwise does not violate any further Misplaced Pages policies or guidelines such as those regarding ] or ].

Editors are cautioned against performing the above actions on numerous articles ''en masse''; an ] stated that editors are '''''"urged to work collaboratively and constructively with the broader community and the editors committed to working on the articles"'''''.

==Relocating non-notable fictional material==
], Misplaced Pages's sibling project, contains instructional and educational texts. These include annotated works of fiction (on the ]) for classroom or private study use. ], similarly, holds original public domain and GFDL source texts. See ]. One possible action to consider is to make use of all of the Wikimedia projects combined: to have an encyclopedia article about the work of fiction on Misplaced Pages giving a brief outline, a chapter-by-chapter annotation on Wikibooks, the full source text on Wikisource (if the work is in the public domain), and ] joining them all together into a whole. However, Wikibooks , so it is not an appropriate place to transwiki large quantities of fictional material.

Fictional material unsuited or too detailed for Misplaced Pages can be ] to a appropriate GFDL-compatible wiki, such as or the ; editors should check with related Wikiprojects to determine if a specific wiki has been selected for transwiking materials. Any transwikied material should be edited to meet the guidelines of specific wikis.


==See also== ==See also==
{{MultiCol}}
* For examples of high quality fiction articles, see the articles that have been rated as ] and ].
;Guidelines, examples and how-tos
* ]
* For examples of high quality fiction articles, see ] and ].
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]
* ]
{{ColBreak}}
;Essays, noticeboards and Wikiprojects
* ]
* ].
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
{{EndMultiCol}}


==Notes== ==Footnotes==
{{reflist}} {{reflist}}


] ]
{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}}

] ]
] ]

Revision as of 03:23, 8 January 2009

The following is a proposed Misplaced Pages policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption.Shortcut
This page in a nutshell: Some fictional elements may not meet the general notability guideline but may still be covered in a standalone article. Those elements must be part of a significant and notable work of fiction, be important to covering that work in an encyclopedic fashion, and must have sufficient reliable sources to allow for an article to be written in a real world context.
For information about writing articles on fiction, see Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). For the previous version of this page, see Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction)/2008 proposal. For specific examples where you may be able to help, see Misplaced Pages:Fiction/Noticeboard.
Notability
General notability guideline
Subject-specific guidelines
See also

Misplaced Pages:Notability (fiction) is a proposed guideline that defines the inclusion criteria for elements of fiction, including individual and serialized works (such as television episodes or comic book series), as well the elements wholly within the fictionalized world (such as characters or settings). Works of fiction distributed through the media of books and film are also (but not exclusively) the subject of separate notability guidelines for books and films respectively. Inclusion criteria for lists are dealt with at Misplaced Pages's list guideline.

In all cases, if a subject relating to a work or element of fiction meets the requirement of the general notability guideline, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. Elements of a notable work of fiction are presumed to be notable if they meet a simple test. The work should be important or significant, the fictional element itself should be important to an encyclopedic understanding of the work, and verifiable information must exist about the subject apart from a plot summary. When assessing a topic's notability, Wikipedians should remember that this and all notability guidelines judge a subject on the basis of currently available sources, not sources present in the article itself, which is not a final draft. Editors should assume good faith for all articles they come across and if they believe that the article does not meet Misplaced Pages standards they should try to improve it or merge it into a section in a larger article before deleting it entirely.

Three-pronged test for notability

Per the general notability guideline, a topic is presumed notable for a standalone article if it is the subject of non-trivial coverage by reliable and independent sources. Some articles on fictional subjects, however, may not meet the general notability guideline. For these articles, a fictional element of a notable work should meet three conditions:

  • Importance of the fictional work: Fictional universes that are considered more culturally or historically significant are more likely to have coverage in reliable sources, and may go into greater depth than a short-form critical review of the work. If those sources present clear claims for the artistic or cultural importance of the fictional work beyond basic notability, it is a good sign that some individual elements of the work may be notable.
  • Importance within the fictional work: The subject should be an episode or non-cameo character that is important or central to understanding the work as a whole. Assessing the importance involves researching commentary from reliable sources on the topic. The work itself can also indicate importance to some extent, but avoid original research or comparisons. Focus on indisputable facts (e.g. "the character appears in every episode") to prove importance, rather than personal opinion. Understanding the overall work does not require exhaustive detail, but may require articles on specific elements that are necessary to explain the work's overall plot and impact.
  • Real-world coverage: Significant real-world information must exist on the subject's development and reception beyond what is revealed in the plot of the fictional work. Examples of development information include creative influences and design processes, while examples of reception information include critical, commercial, or cultural impact. Sometimes this real-world perspective can be established through the use of sources with a connection to the creators of the fictional work, such as developer commentary. Merely listing the notable works where the fictional element appears, their respective release dates, and the names of the production staff is not sufficient. An article with a verifiable real-world perspective that establishes real-world notability will rarely be deleted.

A subject that meets all three of the above criteria may qualify for a standalone article. An article is not a final draft, and a subject can still be notable based on the reasonable belief that adequate evidence of notability exists. But there must be a reasonable belief that evidence exists for all three criteria.

This test does not supersede Misplaced Pages's content and inclusion policies such as those on verifiability and what Misplaced Pages is not. Editors may consider whether the fictional subject could be treated as a section or part of a parent article or list instead of a standalone article, but notability guidelines do not delimit content. No part of this guideline is meant to preempt the editorial decision of content selection and presentation.

Sources and notability

All articles must meet Misplaced Pages's policy on verifiability, where every statement is backed by research from reliable sources. However, a verifiable article is not necessarily notable by Misplaced Pages's standards and merely being verifiable does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion; the general notability guideline requires the use of reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. For fictional subjects, terms such as reliability and independence have specialized meanings.

Reliability

A notable fictional element will have real-world information about its development or reception. Reception, reviews, and criticism must be verified in reliable sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. News organizations and scholarly journals usually ensure reliability through peer review. However, a source may still be considered reliable without these strict content controls. Wikipedians can determine whether a source meets our guideline on reliable sources through consensus. These discussions usually take place at the Reliable sources noticeboard, or at specific WikiProjects.

Independence

Coverage of fiction often benefits from relying on sources that do not meet the strictest standards of independence. Because control over intellectual property is often jealously guarded, much of the background information about fictional subject may come from copyright holders. The idea of an "independent source" was developed to deal with press releases, corporate websites, and self promotion—issues that are less likely to crop up with fictional subjects than biographies or company profiles. However, some care must be taken to ensure that the distribution of fictional articles avoids corporate promotion and adheres to a neutral point of view.

As a result, elements of the three-prong test may be satisfied through the use of non-promotional sources that may or may not be independent from the content creators. These are independent in the sense that they make analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, and/or evaluative claims about the subject. These may include self-published sources such as author or developer commentary which provide significant real-world content about the subject that goes beyond what is revealed in the plot of the fictional work.

Secondary sources are necessary for notability

Further information: ]

A topic about which there are no significant secondary sources cannot pass this guideline. Primary sources, such as the fictional work itself, can be used to verify certain facts about the fictional work, and can contribute towards the second prong of the three-prong test. However, since they offer no real-world perspectives, they cannot provide any information on the first or third prongs, and thus are not enough to establish notability.

Original research and original analysis of primary sources (for example, by speculating about what a scene might imply, or by making detailed comparisons between scenes) should be avoided. Plot summary may be used to a limited extent as described by our content policies, but an article written entirely from primary sources is a warning sign that the subject might not meet the three-pronged test above.

See also

Template:MultiCol

Guidelines, examples and how-tos

| class="col-break " |

Essays, noticeboards and Wikiprojects

Template:EndMultiCol

Footnotes

Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)
Content (?)
P
G
Conduct (?)
P
G
Deletion (?)
P
Enforcement (?)
P
Editing (?)
P
G
Style
Classification
Project content (?)
G
WMF (?)
P
Categories: