Wikipedia:Notability (web): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 16:45, 31 January 2007

WP:WEB redirects here. This page is not Wikipedia:Build the web.

This page documents an English Wikipedia notability criteria.

Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Shortcut

[[:|WP:WEB]]

From WP:NOT#IINFO:

Internet guides. Wikipedia articles should not exist only to describe the nature, appearance or services a website offers, but should describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance, which can be significantly more up-to-date than most reference sources since we can incorporate new developments and facts as they are made known. See current events for examples.

This page gives some rough guidelines which most Wikipedia editors use to decide if any form of web-specific content, being either the content of a website or the specific website itself should have an article on Wikipedia. Web content includes, but is not limited to, webcomics, podcasts, blogs, Internet forums, online magazines and other media, web portals and web hosts. Any content which is distributed solely on the internet is considered, for the purposes of this guideline, as web content.^[1]

Wikipedians are averse to the use of Wikipedia for advertising, and Wikipedia articles are not advertisements is an official policy of long standing. Advertising is either cleaned up to adhere to the neutral point of view or deleted.^[2]

Wikipedia is not a web directory, in that it is not a site that specializes in linking to other web sites and categorizing those links. Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. Articles which merely include an external link and a brief description of its contents will also be either cleaned up to adhere to the neutral point of view or deleted.

In the case of such articles being listed for deletion, such a listing occurs at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, and Wikipedia editors apply the criteria outlined here.

Criteria

This page's designation as a policy or guideline is disputed or under discussion. Please see the relevant talk page discussion for further information.

Notability on Wikipedia for Web-specific content^[3] is based on the following criterion:

The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
- This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations.^[4] except for the following:
  - Media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site.^[5]
  - Trivial coverage, such as (1) newspaper articles that simply report the internet address, (2) newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, (3) a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of internet addresses and site or (4) content descriptions in internet directories or online stores.

The above is the central criterion for inclusion. Below are some criteria that make it very likely that sufficient reliable information is available about particular Web content. Web content that satisfies at least one of the items below may merit its own Wikipedia article, as there is likely to be a good deal of verifiable information available and a good deal of public interest regarding it.

The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization.^[6]
The content is distributed via a medium which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster.^[7]

The article itself must provide proof that its subject meets one of these criteria via inlined links or a "Reference" or "External link" section. Even if an entire website meets the notability criteria, its components (forums, articles, sections) are not necessarily notable and deserving of their own separate article.

Notes

^ Content which has been packaged into material form, such as onto CD, DVD or book form, but which is still primarily only available for sale via the internet, still falls under these guidelines. If such packaging of the product is widely available for sale in major brick and mortar retailers, then it should be considered a product, for which see Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations).
^ Websites or content which fail these guidelines but are linked to a topic or subject which does merit inclusion may be redirected to that topic or subject rather than be listed for deletion.
^ Discussions of websites should be incorporated (with a redirect if necessary) into an article about the parent organization, unless the domain-name of the website is the most common way of referring to the organization. For example, yahoo.com is a redirect to Yahoo!. On the other hand Drugstore.com is a standalone page.
^
Examples:
- The webcomic When I Am King has been reviewed by The Guardian, Playboy, The Comics Journal, and Wired.
- The blog Daily Kos has been covered by Los Angeles Times, Time, The Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report, and The New York Times.
^ Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. The published works must be someone else writing about the company, corporation, product, or service. (See Wikipedia:Autobiography for the verifiability and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material.) The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the content or site notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it.
^ Examples of such awards: Eisner Awards or Webby Awards. See Category:Awards for more. Being nominated for an award in multiple years is also considered an indicator of notability.
^ Content that is distributed by independent online sites will almost certainly satisfy the first criterion. However, this criterion ensures that our coverage of such content will be complete regardless. For example, Ricky Gervais had a podcast distributed by The Guardian. Such distributions should be nontrivial. Although GeoCities and Newgrounds are exceedingly well known, hosting content on them is trivial.

[1] Content which has been packaged into material form, such as onto CD, DVD or book form, but which is still primarily only available for sale via the internet, still falls under these guidelines. If such packaging of the product is widely available for sale in major brick and mortar retailers, then it should be considered a product, for which see Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations).

[2] Websites or content which fail these guidelines but are linked to a topic or subject which does merit inclusion may be redirected to that topic or subject rather than be listed for deletion.

[3] Discussions of websites should be incorporated (with a redirect if necessary) into an article about the parent organization, unless the domain-name of the website is the most common way of referring to the organization. For example, yahoo.com is a redirect to Yahoo!. On the other hand Drugstore.com is a standalone page.

[4] Examples:
The webcomic When I Am King has been reviewed by The Guardian, Playboy, The Comics Journal, and Wired.

The blog Daily Kos has been covered by Los Angeles Times, Time, The Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report, and The New York Times.

[5] The webcomic When I Am King has been reviewed by The Guardian, Playboy, The Comics Journal, and Wired.

[6] The blog Daily Kos has been covered by Los Angeles Times, Time, The Washington Post, U.S. News & World Report, and The New York Times.

[5] Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. The published works must be someone else writing about the company, corporation, product, or service. (See Wikipedia:Autobiography for the verifiability and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material.) The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the content or site notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it.

[6] Examples of such awards: Eisner Awards or Webby Awards. See Category:Awards for more. Being nominated for an award in multiple years is also considered an indicator of notability.

[7] Content that is distributed by independent online sites will almost certainly satisfy the first criterion. However, this criterion ensures that our coverage of such content will be complete regardless. For example, Ricky Gervais had a podcast distributed by The Guardian. Such distributions should be nontrivial. Although GeoCities and Newgrounds are exceedingly well known, hosting content on them is trivial.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ==Criteria==
+{{Disputedpolicy-section}}
 [[WP:N|Notability]] on Wikipedia for Web-specific content<ref>Discussions of websites should be incorporated (with a redirect if necessary) into an article about the parent organization, unless the domain-name of the website is the most common way of referring to the organization.  For example, [[yahoo.com]] is a redirect to [[Yahoo!]]. On the other hand [[Drugstore.com]] is a standalone page.</ref> is based on the following criterion:
-* The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] which are independent of the site itself.
+* The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself.
-* This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations, <ref>Examples:
+** This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations.<ref>Examples:
 * The webcomic ''[[When I Am King]]'' has been reviewed by ''[[The Guardian]]'', ''[[Playboy (magazine)|Playboy]]'', ''[[The Comics Journal]]'', and ''[[Wired magazine|Wired]]''.
 * The blog [[Daily Kos]] has been covered by ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'', ''[[The Washington Post]]'', ''[[U.S. News & World Report]]'', and ''[[The New York Times]]''.</ref> ''except'' for the following:
-** Media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site, as articles cannot be based solely on self-published primary sources. <ref>Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article.  The published works must be ''someone else'' writing about the company, corporation, product, or service.  (See [[Wikipedia:Autobiography]] for the verifiability and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material.)  The barometer of notability is whether people ''independent'' of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the content or site notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it.</ref>
+*** Media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site.<ref>Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article.  The published works must be ''someone else'' writing about the company, corporation, product, or service.  (See [[Wikipedia:Autobiography]] for the verifiability and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material.)  The barometer of notability is whether people ''independent'' of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, or vendor) have actually considered the content or site notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works that focus upon it.</ref>
-** Trivial coverage, such as (1) newspaper articles that simply report the internet address, (2) newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, (3) a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of internet addresses and site or (4) content descriptions in internet directories or [[Electronic commerce|online stores]].
+*** Trivial coverage, such as (1) newspaper articles that simply report the internet address, (2) newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, (3) a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of internet addresses and site or (4) content descriptions in internet directories or [[Electronic commerce|online stores]].
+The above is the [[WP:N|central criterion]] for inclusion. Below are some criteria that make it very likely that sufficient reliable information is available about particular Web content. Web content that satisfies at least one of the items below may merit its own Wikipedia article, as there is likely to be a good deal of verifiable information available and a good deal of public interest regarding it.
 * The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization.<ref>Examples of such awards: [[Eisner Award]]s or [[Webby Awards]].  See [[:Category:Awards]] for more.  Being nominated for an award in multiple years is also considered an indicator of notability.</ref>
 * The content is distributed via a medium which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster.<ref>Content that is distributed by independent online sites will almost certainly satisfy the first criterion.  However, this criterion ensures that our coverage of such content will be complete regardless.  For example, [[Ricky Gervais]] had a [[podcasting|podcast]] distributed by ''[[The Guardian]]''.  Such distributions should be nontrivial. Although [[GeoCities]] and [[Newgrounds]] are exceedingly well known, hosting content on them is trivial.</ref>
-The article itself must provide proof that its subject meets  the stated criteria by [[WP:CITE|citing sources]]. Even if an ''entire'' website meets the notability criteria, its ''components'' (forums, articles, sections) are not necessarily notable and deserving of their own separate article.
+The article itself must provide proof that its subject meets one of these criteria via inlined links or a "Reference" or "External link" section.  Even if an ''entire'' website meets the notability criteria, its ''components'' (forums, articles, sections) are not necessarily notable and deserving of their own separate article.
 == See also ==
@@ Line 35: / Line 38: @@
 == Notes ==
+<!--See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags-->
-{{reflist|1}}
+<references/>
 [[ru:Википедия:Критерии значимости веб-сайтов]]