Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fordmadoxfraud (talk | contribs) at 15:53, 9 June 2008 (→General notability guideline: first guideline edit). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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. Other factors may also give evidence of notability, as indicated by subject-specific guidelines.

Within Misplaced Pages, notability is an inclusion criterion based on encyclopedic suitability of a topic for a Misplaced Pages article. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice". Notability is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity", although these may positively correlate with it. A topic is presumed to be sufficiently notable to merit an article if it meets the general notability guideline below, or if it meets an accepted subject-specific standard found in the guidelines listed in the table to the right. If an article currently does not give clear evidence of its notability, that does not necessarily mean that its topic is not notable.

These notability guidelines only pertain to the encyclopedic suitability of topics for articles but do not directly limit the content of articles. Relevant content policies include: Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Misplaced Pages is not, and Biographies of living persons.

Definition

There is no clear definition of notability, for Misplaced Pages's purposes, beyond the trivial "worthy of note". In general, when we ask "is this topic notable", we mean "is there any likelihood that the general public (or those active within a given specialism or subculture) will be interested in this". The general notability guideline below tests this by asking if existing reliable sources have felt it worth their time and resources to cover the topic, but this is not the only way of testing notability. The community has developed a number of guidelines accepted by consensus, as well as active proposals, for testing notability within specific subject domains. The general notability guideline is, however, felt to be the only workable guideline that may demonstrate the notability of any topic.

Whichever guideline or criterion is used to test notability, it should be noted that passing a criterion indicates that a topic is most likely notable, while failing it does not indicate that a topic is most likely not notable. However, the term "non-notable" is often used to describe topics for which there has been no successful demonstration of notability by any accepted standard. Within the terms of the deletion policy, articles on such "non-notable" topics may end up deleted or merged (see Handling articles not satisfying the notability guidelines below for further guidance).

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.

• "Presumed" means that substantive coverage in multiple independent reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, of notability. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not suitable for inclusion. For example, it may violate what Misplaced Pages is not.
• "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 may be 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 is 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 (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.

A topic for which this criterion is deemed to have been met by consensus, is usually worthy of notice and is thus considered notable.

General characteristics of notability

There are a number of subject specific guidelines, listed above and found in Category:Misplaced Pages notability guidelines. While each of these may give any means of testing the notability of topics within their area, there are some general principles that should generaly be adhered to, and generally apply regardless of whether the general notability guideline or a subject-specific guideline is used.

Notability requires objective evidence

• WP:N#OBJ
• WP:NOBJ

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 is one example of such objective evidence; the subject specific guidelines give others.

Misplaced Pages 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.

Notability is not temporary

• WP:N#TEMP
• WP:NTEMP

If a subject has met the general notability guideline, there is no need to show continual coverage or interest in the topic, though subjects that do not meet the guideline at one point in time may do so as time passes and more sources come into existence. 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

• WP:NNC
• WP:N#NCONTENT

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 (with the exception of lists of people ). The particular topics and facts within an article are not each required to meet the standards of the notability guidelines; instead, article content is governed by other policies and guidelines, such as the policy requiring Verifiability and the guidelines covering the use of reliable sources and of trivia sections.

The undue weight guideline applies to factual content and not just viewpoints. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements.

Depending on the particular content, these policies and guidelines may require that content meet specific criteria. Care should be taken to read these policies and guidelines before adding information of questionable importance or relevance to any article.

Notability is not sufficient

That a topic be considered worthy of note is not sufficient for it to be possible or desirable to create an encyclopaedic article on the subject. Key policies, including What Misplaced Pages Is Not, verifiability, neutral point-of-view, and no original research must be satisfied. It is not practical to go into a full description of the interactions of these policies with each other and with the notability guideline here; however, here are a few points of particular note:

• A stub article can be encyclopaedic in itself, and may never need expansion; however, in most cases an article consisting of a few sentences and an infobox is not a complete encyclopaedic article. Thus, in most cases, if there is no expectation that an article may grow beyond a stub, the article may not be considered appropriate for wikipedia.
• Even where subject-specific guidelines do not require "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", remember that there must still be enough information that may be confirmed through reliable sources without original research to write a useful article. This may come from sources not generally considered to speak to notability, such as directories or company registrations.

Handling articles not satisfying the notability guidelines

Although articles should demonstrate the notability of their topics, and articles on topics that do not meet this criteria are generally deleted, it is important to not just consider whether notability is established by the article, but whether it readily could be. When discussing whether to delete or merge an article due to non-notability, the discussion should focus not only on whether notability is established in the article, but on what the probability is that notability could be established. If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources. For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort.

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 or an expert on the subject 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, consider merging the article's content 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.

Notes

1. Moreover, 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 actually support notability when examined, despite their existence as reliable sources. Correspondingly, editors may reach a consensus that a topic is notable even in the dearth or absence of independent sources.
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. 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. Otherwise, someone could give their own topic as much notability as they want by simply expounding on it outside of Misplaced Pages, which would defeat the purpose of the concept. Also, neutral sources should exist in order to guarantee a neutral article can be written — self-promotion is not neutral (obviously), and self-published sources often are biased if even unintentionally: see Misplaced Pages:Autobiography and Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest for discussion of neutrality concerns of such sources. Even non-promotional self-published sources, in the rare cases they may exist, are still not evidence of notability as they do not measure the attention a subject has received by the world at large.
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. Mere republications of a single source or news wire service do not always constitute multiple works. 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.
6. 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. See also: Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest for handling of such situations.
7. See Misplaced Pages:Notability (people)#Lists of people
8. Sometimes contacting the subject of a biography or the representative of a subject organization will yield independent source material. Of course we have to be careful to observe and evaluate independence. You might also see if there is a wikipedia project related to the topic, and ask for help there.
9. 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.
10. 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.