Misplaced Pages

:Notability: 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 01:10, 24 September 2007 view sourceFT2 (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators55,546 edits →General notability guideline: trim back to original per talk page, leaving split sentence← Previous edit Revision as of 01:38, 24 September 2007 view source FT2 (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators55,546 edits →General notability guideline: important qualifier hidden in footnote, about sources which are "merely restating the same information", not clear in main article. Clarify.Next edit →
Line 14: Line 14:
* '''"Reliable"''' means sources need editorial integrity to allow ] evaluation of notability, per ]. Sources may encompass ] works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject are a good test for notability.<ref>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. (See ] for the attribution and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material. Also see ].) The barometer of notability is whether people ''independent'' of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it. </ref> * '''"Reliable"''' means sources need editorial integrity to allow ] evaluation of notability, per ]. Sources may encompass ] works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject are a good test for notability.<ref>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. (See ] for the attribution and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material. Also see ].) The barometer of notability is whether people ''independent'' of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it. </ref>
* '''"Sources,"'''<ref>Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc. In the absence of multiple sources, it must be possible to verify that the source reflects a neutral point of view, is credible and provides sufficient detail for a comprehensive article.</ref> defined on Misplaced Pages as ], provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.<ref>Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic.</ref> * '''"Sources,"'''<ref>Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc. In the absence of multiple sources, it must be possible to verify that the source reflects a neutral point of view, is credible and provides sufficient detail for a comprehensive article.</ref> defined on Misplaced Pages as ], provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.<ref>Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic.</ref>
* '''"Independent of the subject"''' excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, ] material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.<ref>Several journals simultaneously publishing articles in the same geographic region about an occurrence, does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article within the same geographic region from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.</ref> * '''"Independent of the subject"''' excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, ] material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, simple republications of a single source, etc.<ref>Several journals simultaneously publishing articles in the same geographic region about an occurrence, does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article within the same geographic region from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.</ref>


A topic for which this criterion is deemed to have been met by consensus, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the criteria for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article. A topic for which this criterion is deemed to have been met by consensus, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the criteria for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article.

Revision as of 01:38, 24 September 2007

"WP:NOTE" redirects here. You may also be looking for WP:CITE, WP:NOT or WP:FOOT.
Blue tickThis page documents an English Misplaced Pages notability guideline.
Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page.		Shortcuts
This page in a nutshell: A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.
Notability
General notability guideline
Subject-specific guidelines
See also

Within Misplaced Pages, Notability is an article inclusion criterion based on encyclopedic suitability. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice". This concept is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity". A subject is presumed to be sufficiently notable if it meets the general notability guideline below, or if it meets an accepted subject specific standard listed in the table to the right.

These guidelines pertain to the suitability of article topics but do not directly limit the content of articles.

General notability guideline

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

  • "Presumed" means a rebuttable presumption. Substantive coverage in reliable sources suggests that the subject is notable. However, many subjects with such coverage may still be non-notable – they fail What Misplaced Pages is not, or the coverage does not actually speak to notability when examined.
  • "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but less than exclusive.
  • "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject are a good test for notability.
  • "Sources," defined on Misplaced Pages as secondary sources, provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.
  • "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, simple republications of a single source, etc.

A topic for which this criterion is deemed to have been met by consensus, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the criteria for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article.

Notability requires objective evidence

The common theme in the notability guidelines is the requirement for verifiable objective evidence to support a claim of notability. Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines.

Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines

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

  • Ask the article's creator for advice on where to look for sources.
  • Put the {{notability}} tag on the article to alert other editors. To place a dated tag, put a {{subst:dated|notability}} tag.
  • If the article is about a specialized field, use the {{expert-subject}} tag with a specific WikiProject to attract editors knowledgeable about that field, who may have access to reliable sources not available online.

If appropriate sources cannot be found, if possible, merge the article into a broader article providing context. Otherwise, if deleting:

  • If the article meets our criteria for speedy deletion, one can use a criterion-specific deletion tag listed on that page.
  • Use the {{prod}} tag, for articles which 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. For more information, see Misplaced Pages:Proposed deletion.
  • For cases where you are unsure about deletion or believe others might object, nominate the article for the articles for deletion process, where the merits will be debated and deliberated for 5 days.

Notability is not temporary

Wikinews, not Misplaced Pages, is better suited to present topics receiving a short burst of present news coverage. Thus, this guideline properly considers the long-term written coverage of persons and events. In particular, a short burst of present news coverage about a topic does not necessarily constitute objective evidence of long-term notability. Conversely, if long-term coverage has been sufficiently demonstrated, there is no need to show continual coverage or interest.

Topics that did not meet the notability guidelines at one point in time may meet the notability guidelines as time passes. However, articles should not be written based on speculation that the topic may receive additional coverage in the future.

Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content

Shortcut
  • ]

Notability guidelines give guidance on whether a topic is notable enough to be included in Misplaced Pages as a separate article, but do not specifically regulate the content of articles, which is governed by other guidelines such as those on using reliable sources and on handling trivia. The particular topics and facts within an article are not each required to meet the standards of the notability guidelines.

See also

Essays related to notability:

References

  1. For example, adverts, announcements, minor news stories, and coverage with low levels of discrimination, are all examples of matters that may not be notable for the purposes of article creation, despite the existence of reliable sources. For examples of other circumstances also agreed by consensus to override this presumption, see Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not.
  2. Examples: The 360-page book by Sobel and the 528-page book by Black on IBM are plainly non-trivial. The one sentence mention by Walker of the band Three Blind Mice in a biography of Bill Clinton (Martin Walker (1992-01-06). "Tough love child of Kennedy". The Guardian. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)) is plainly trivial.
  3. 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. (See Misplaced Pages:Autobiography for the attribution and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material. Also see Misplaced Pages:Independent sources.) The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it.
  4. Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc. In the absence of multiple sources, it must be possible to verify that the source reflects a neutral point of view, is credible and provides sufficient detail for a comprehensive article.
  5. Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic.
  6. Several journals simultaneously publishing articles in the same geographic region about an occurrence, does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article within the same geographic region from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.
  7. For instance, articles on minor characters in a work of fiction may be merged into a "list of minor characters in ..."; articles on schools may be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located; relatives of a famous person may be merged into the article on the person; articles on persons only notable for being associated with a certain group or event may be merged into the main article on that group or event.
  8. Misplaced Pages editors have been known to reject nominations for deletion that have been inadequately researched. Research should include attempts to find sources which might demonstrate notability, and/or information which would demonstrate notability in another manner.
  9. See Misplaced Pages is not an indiscriminate collection of information; #5 News reports.
Categories: