User:Rosguill/Pulpfiction621 NPPSCHOOL

Hello, welcome to your New Page Patrol School page! Please make sure you have this page added to your watchlist. Your NPP School page has been specifically designed according to you and what you have requested instruction in - for that reason, please be as specific as possible when under my instruction, so that I know the best ways to help you (and do not be afraid to let me know if you think something isn't working).

Make sure you read through Wikipedia:Notability as that's the knowledge which most of the questions I ask you and tasks you do will revolve around.

How to use this page

This page will be built up over your time in the School, with new sections being added as you complete old ones. Each section will end with a task, written in bold type - this might just ask a question, or it might require you to go and do something. You can answer a question by typing the answer below the task; if you have to do something, you will need to provide diffs to demonstrate that you have completed the task. Some sections will have more than one task, sometimes additional tasks may be added to a section as you complete them. Please always sign your responses to tasks as you would on a talk page.

If both the instructor and student make completing the course curriculum a top priority, it will generally take around a month to go through the entirety of the curriculum. This pace is not required or necessarily expected, but rather is provided in order to give participants an idea of what to expect. It is also worth stressing that NPP's focus is on "quality, not quantity" so there should not be a rush to complete assignments.

Notability

PART 1

Questions

Question 1

In your own words, how is notability defined on Wikipedia?

Notability on Wikipedia is when an article has a good amount of reliable material (i.e. sources or other content considered to be RS) that necessitates it being it's own article. This must also include that the sources do not have significant bias, i.e. advertising, autobiographical, or other factors that would threaten the independent nature of the work.

Y, I balked a bit at the mention of bias, as when assessing source reliability we often consider sources with well-established political biases to still be reliable for statements of fact, but the above answer is essentially correct, as the biases described are all conflicts of interest that do undermine independence. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Question 2

Would step by step instructions on "How to change a car tire" be considered a notable topic in Wikipedia? Why or why not?

First, I believe that it would depend on if the sources were reliable and that there was not hidden self promotion embedded into the article (i.e. if the only sources would link out to one specific mechanic as a form of disguised self-promotion). If that was the case, then it would likely be a notable topic since it meets the requirements of having reliable material and that it is not fringe, self-promoting in nature, or any other form or fashion that would deem it to be unfit to become an article.

N, WP:NOTHOWTO _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Question 3

What are the differences between the WP:GNG and the subject-specific notability guidelines? How do we determine which one to use when patrolling an article?

The difference between General Notability Guidelines and subject-specific notability guidelines is that GNG apply to stand-alone articles while SSNG apply to articles that expand the content of stand-alone articles. I would determine which guideline to use by determining the nature of the article. If it is stand-alone, i.e. if the topic does not directly relate to many other topics, then I would use GNG, if it does directly relate to other topics, then I would use SSNG.

Pulpfiction621 (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

N, GNG applies to all articles. The exact purpose and nature of SNGs is a matter of debate in the editing community, but the way I like to think of them is that they're shortcuts to GNG, where the idea is that if the SNG is met, it should be taken as an almost-certain sign that GNG can be met, even if the article doesn't have enough sources to demonstrate that at the moment. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Subject-specific notability guidelines

1. Please categorize the subject-specific notability guidelines (listed at Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines) into the following three categories

Primarily additional criteria that are likely to indicate notability

Primarily additional considerations that define or restrict the nature of coverage or sources required

Even mix of the previous two categories

2. Virtually all SNGs that provide additional notability criteria specify that these criteria may indicate that the subject meets notability guidelines. How would you interpret this caveat as a new page reviewer?