Wikipedia:Essays in a nutshell/Notability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Essay.svg Nutshell.png This essays in a nutshell page summarizes the gist of user written essays on Wikipedia. Essays can also be navigated via categories, navigation templates, or Special:Search. For more information on navigating essays, see Wikipedia:About essay searching.

Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies.

Shortcut:
WP:NUTNOT
Essay In a nutshell Shortcuts Impact
Alternative outlets

There are other places for potentially useful or valuable content which is not appropriate for Wikipedia.

WP:OUT, WP:ALTOUT, WP:OUTLET, WP:ALTERNATIVE, WP:ALTERNATE

Mid

Articles with a single source

If an article is based on only one source, there may be copyright, original research, and notability concerns.

WP:ONESOURCE, WP:1R

Low

Bare notability

Be cautious with creating articles that are borderline notable. A subject that seems to be barely notable may really not be notable at all.

WP:BARE, WP:MINIMUM

Low

Bombardment

Don't indiscriminately add excessive references to an article in the hope that weight of numbers will prevent it from being deleted.

WP:BOMBARD

Mid

Every snowflake is unique

Many similar items can have encyclopedic articles of their own; article's content should describe which peculiarities distinguish one item from the others, based on critical commentary found in reliable sources. Focus on quality, not quantity.

WP:SNOWFLAKE

Mid

Existence ≠ Notability

Truth alone is not a valid criteria for inclusion.

WP:E=N, WP:ENN, WP:ENEN, WP:EXISTENCE, WP:POPULARITY

Low

Fancruft

Avoid subjects that are trivial and of importance only to a small population of fans.

WP:FAN, WP:CRUFT, WP:FANCRUFT

Top

Subjective importance

Some subjects may seem notable because they are perceived as being important. By without meeting Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, they are not notable.

WP:FACTORS

Mid

I wouldn't know him from a hole in the ground

Biographies must be on subjects that are notable. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.

WP:HOLE

Low

Inclusion is not an indicator of notability

Anyone can edit Wikipedia. Inclusion on Wikipedia has no effect on a subject's notability . Non-inclusion does not indicate a lack of notability.

WP:INN, WP:ININ

Low

Inherent notability

Ultimately, the community decides if a subject is intrinsically notable.

WP:IHN, WP:INHERENT

Low

Insignificant

Significance can be subjective. Inclusion on Wikipedia is based on notability, not significance.

WP:INSIGNIFICANT WP:SIGNIFICANT

Low

Masking the lack of notability

Excellent prose and the sheer number of citations or external links has no effect on a subject's notability.

WP:MASK

Low

No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability

When notability is legitimately invoked as an issue in a deletion nomination, the problem usually cannot be solved by better editing.

WP:AKON, WP:AMOUNT, WP:OVERCOME

Low

No one cares about your garage band

Don't start an article on your band if you don't have much of an audience yet.

WP:GARAGEBAND, WP:MYSPACEBAND, WP:YAMB

Mid

No one really cares

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Don't make an article on a subject so trivial or arbitrary that no one could ever conceivably care about it. However, not caring does not always mean not notable.

WP:CARES, WP:NOONECARES, WP:DONTGIVEASHIT

Low

Notability does not degrade over time

Notability of a subject doesn't degrade over time.

WP:DEGRADE

Low

Notability is important

Non-notable subjects cannot be allowed articles because said articles tend to cause more problems than they're worth.

WP:NII

Unranked

Notability is not a level playing field

Notability is not "a level playing field". In some areas, notability requirements are lower than others.

WP:PLAYINGFIELD

Low

Notability is not a matter of opinion

In a deletion discussion, arguments for keeping the article should be based on reliable sources, not opinions.

WP:NMO, WP:NWYB

Low

Notability outranks POV disputes

An article that attracts POV pushing can still be notable. This does not mean you should create a POV fork.

WP:POVNOTABLE

Unranked

Notability sub-pages

Notability guideline sub-pages should only be created if there is a specific need to do so. They should not set an inclusion criteria less restrictive than WP:N. A guideline proposal may contain inclusion criteria that are more restrictive than WP:N, but note that there is currently no consensus regarding these type of criteria.

WP:NSUBS, WP:NSP

Low

Notability vs. prominence

A subject is notable if there are enough reliable sources for an article or a section of an article to be devoted to it in Wikipedia. Wikipedia strives to include information about an individual idea in rough proportion to how prominent the idea is in the sum total of reliable, third-party sources.

Low

Obscure does not mean not notable

Just because a topic is of little interest to the general public does not mean Wikipedia should not include it. Also when writing articles about obscure topics Wikipedians do not have to consider the general audience.

WP:OBSCURE

Low

On Wikipedia, solutions are mixtures and nothing else

Public relations slang, like "we offer solutions", is a good indication that an article is promotional and likely not notable.

WP:SOLUTION

Unranked

Other stuff exists

That other similar articles exist is an argument to avoid in deletion discussions, content disputes, and other discussions and will typically be dismissed while still assuming good faith. When used properly, a logical rationalization of "Other Stuff Exists" may be used in a perfectly valid manner in discussions of what articles to create, delete, or retain. Wikipedia has, unintentionally, set a precedent for inclusion or exclusion when notability is contested (for example, high schools or geographic features), and in these situations this type of argument may be worth introducing.

WP:OSE

Low

Pokémon test

The Pokémon test was originally used prior to the merger of most Pokémon into the list of Pokémon, but is analogous to situations where several less-than-notable topics of a common subject matter are merged together. This essay describes the historical context of this test.

WP:POKEMON, WP:PTEST, WP:KIT, WP:KAREN

Mid

Red flags of non-notability

There are obvious indicators that a subject is unambiguously not notable.

WP:RFNN, WP:REDFLAGSOFNONNOTABILITY

Low

Run-of-the-mill

There are some items that are very commonplace for which sources verifying their accuracy do exist. But there are so many of these that can be verified given the same sources, there cannot possibly be an article on each one, and only those with additional sources deserve articles.

WP:MILL WP:ROTM WP:COOKIE

Mid

Schoolcruft

Avoid trivia that is of importance only to a small population of students.

WP:SCFT, WP:SCHOOLCRUFT

Low

Semi-notability

Topics that fall short of meeting Wikipedia's notability guidelines but have some coverage are eligible for coverage within an article to the extent they can be verified.

WP:SEMI-N

Low

Sources must be out-of-universe

Because of the nature of writing a fictional universe non-notable concepts can appear to have many, many sources. In reality these sources are all inappropriate because they are not only primary sources, but are not independent of the topic being discussed. Notability should be based on real-life impact.

WP:OOUOnly, WP:NSB

Unranked

Too soon

Sometimes it's simply just too soon for some topics to have an article.

WP:TOOSOON, WP:NotJustYet

Unranked

Trivial mentions

Notability requires significant coverage by reliable sources. Trivial mentions are not enough.

WP:TRIVIALMENTION, WP:ONESENTENCE

Unranked

Two prongs of notability

Notability implies two things, that a subject is worthy of note, and that we have the ability to write an encyclopedia article about it in a verifiable manner

WP:TWOPRONGS

Unranked

Up and coming next big thing

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Future fame has no effect on present notability.

WP:UPANDCOMING, WP:NEXTBIGTHING, WP:RISING, WP:SHOWSPOTENTIAL

Low

Vanispamcruftisement

Vanispamcruftisement is a portmanteau comprising several editorial faults which some Wikipedians see as cardinal sins: vanity (i.e., conflict of interest), spam, cruft, and advertisement.

WP:VSCA, WP:VANISPAM

Low

What isn't grounds for article deletion:

An article should only be deleted if the topic is not appropriate for Wikipedia. If the article is not well-written and doesn't conform to Wikipedia guidelines, it should be revised, not deleted.

WP:WIGAD, WP:NOGROUNDS

Low

Who is a low profile individual

A low-profile individual is a person, usually notable for only one event, who has not sought or desired the attention.

WP:LOWPROFILE, WP:WIALPI

Low

Why can't I advertise my company or product on Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is not a site for advertising. Entries must meet the encyclopedia's notability guidelines.

Low

Why should I care?

Assume that others will not improve your article for you. Make sure an article meets Wikipedia's notability, reliable sources, and verification guidelines before creating it.

WP:WTH, WP:WSIC

Low

Wikipedia doesn't care how many friends you have

The number of fans or followers a subject has is irrelevant in a deletion discussion. Notability determines if an article is kept.

WP:NFRIENDS, WP:NOFRIENDS, WP:NUMFRIENDS

Unranked

Wikipedia is not Google

Wikipedia is not a search engine. It's an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of information.

WP:WING, WP:NSE, WP:NG

Low

Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause

It is secondary coverage in reliable sources which determines if a topic should be covered by Wikipedia, not how well-intentioned it is.

WP:NOBLECAUSE, WP:NOBLE, WP:NOBILITY, WP:WORTHYCAUSE

Low

Wikipuffery

Don't use unsubstantiated adjectives to exaggerate the notability of an article to prevent deletion.

WP:PUFF, WP:LARD

Low

Your alma mater is not your ticket to Wikipedia

Do not add a name to the "notable alumni" section of that person's alma mater unless that person is actually notable.

WP:ALMA, WP:ALMAMATER

Unranked

By subject[edit]

Essay In a nutshell Shortcuts Impact
Academic journals

Subjects of articles on academic journals are required to be notable; that is significant, interesting, or unusual enough to be worthy of notice, as evidenced by being the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources. Many academic journals are notably influential in the world of ideas without being the subject of secondary sources.

WP:NJournals

Unranked

Aircraft

Aircraft types will almost always be notable. Aircraft subtypes and variants may be notable. Aircraft types currently or once under development may be notable. Individual aircraft will very seldom be notable.

Unranked

Breweries

Breweries are organisations and beer is their product; as such, the main guidance for notability for breweries can be found at WP:ORG, while main guidance for individual beer brands can be found at WP:Product.

WP:Breweries

Unranked

Fiction

Fictional elements are expected to follow the same notability guidelines as any other topic.

WP:FICT, WP:FICTION, WP:NFICT

High

Geographical features

Subjects of articles on geographical features are required to be notable; a geographical area, location, place or other object is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are, in the case of artificial features, independent of the bodies which have a vested interest in these.

WP:NGEO, WP:NGEOG

High

High schools

High schools/secondary schools are generally considered to be notable, but they must be able to meet the relevant guidelines for notability.

WP:NHS

Low

Highways

National highways are generally notable. However, all articles on highways must meet the general notability guidelines.

Unranked

Media

A media outlet is notable if there is significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.

WP:NME, WP:NMEDIA

Unranked

Games

A game is appropriate for an article if it has been the subject of significant commentary or analysis in published sources that are independent of the game creator.

WP:NGAME

Unranked

Periodicals

Articles about periodicals (magazines, newspapers, academic journals, and similar) are required to meet notability criteria by citing significant commentary in independent reliable secondary sources. Many periodicals are notably influential without being the subject of secondary sources.

WP:PERIODICAL, WP:NMAG, WP:NNEWSPAPER, WP:NMAGAZINE

Unranked

Places of local interest

An article about a local place or person may be created if there is enough referenced information to make it encyclopedic. Otherwise, include the information in the nearest appropriate parent article.

WP:LOCAL

Unranked

Planned films

Through consideration of policy, sometimes even a "planned film" might have enough persisitant critical commentary over an extended period of time so that the topic of the planned film might itself be determined as worthy of note.

WP:FFILM

Unranked

Poker players

Articles on poker players should generally meet the notability guidelines for athletes.

Unranked

Railway lines and stations

An article about a railway station or railway line could be created if there's enough referenced information to make it encyclopedic. Otherwise, include the station or line in a parent article.

WP:STATION

Low

Software

Software articles should avoid promotional wording and establish significance. Consider the circumstances surrounding an article in relation to the type of sources used. Before nominating an unsourced article for deletion, make sure to verify that it is non-notable, not just missing citations

WP:NSOFT

Unranked

Vehicles

Broad types of vehicles will almost always be notable. Subtypes and variants may be notable. Vehicles currently or once under development may be notable. Individual vehicles, other than large ships, will very seldom be notable.

Unranked

Video games

A video game release is appropriate for a stand-alone article if it has been the subject of significant commentary in multiple published sources which are independent of the video game developer. Avoid creating new articles about re-releases or expansions if they will be short or redundant, and cover smaller releases at the article about the original game.

Unranked