Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists: Difference between revisions
change heading to reflect article rename |
Will Beback (talk | contribs) →Lead and selection criteria: rm undisucssed change that does not reflect actual practice |
||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
== Lead and selection criteria == |
== Lead and selection criteria == |
||
Lists should begin with a [[Wikipedia:lead section|lead section]] that presents unambiguous statements of membership criteria |
Lists should begin with a [[Wikipedia:lead section|lead section]] that presents unambiguous statements of membership criteria. Many lists on Wikipedia have been created without any membership criteria, and editors are left to guess about what or who should be included only from the name of the list. Even if it might "seem obvious" what qualifies for membership in a list, ''explicit is better than implicit.'' Non-obvious characteristics of the list, for instance regarding the list structure, should also be explained in the lead section. |
||
When deciding what to include on a list, ask yourself: |
When deciding what to include on a list, ask yourself: |
||
Revision as of 04:33, 2 May 2008
 | This page documents an English Wikipedia style guideline. 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. |
Stand-alone lists and "lists of links" are Wikipedia articles that contain primarily a list. The list usually consist of links to articles in a particular subject area, such as people or places or a timeline of events. The title of these entries always begin with the phrase list of or timeline of. Stand-alone lists are Wikipedia articles, and as such are equally subject to Wikipedia's content policies such as Verifiability, No original research, Neutral point of view, and others.
Formats of articles that are lists
There are a number of formats currently used on Wikipedia, both generalized and specialized, for articles that are lists.
Formats for general lists ("List of" articles) include:
- alphabetized lists or indexes such as List of mathematics articles, List of economics topics, as well as simple alphabetized lists without letter subheadings.
- annotated lists such as List of business theorists and Production, costs, and pricing.
- subheading-structured lists (i.e., categorized or hierarchical lists) such as List of basic geography topics, List of cat breeds, List of finance topics, List of marketing topics, Lists of mathematics topics, and Lists of philosophers.
- chronological lists such as Deaths in 2007 and List of winners and shortlisted authors of the Booker Prize for Fiction. (Lists whose titles begin "Timeline of" are, of course, always chronological.)
- sortable lists, which are formatted as tables, such as List of social networking websites
Formats for specialized lists include:
- timelines such as Timeline of architectural styles, which use the timeline syntax. (Almost all "Timeline of" lists do not use the timeline syntax.)
- glossaries, a type of annotated list, where the annotations are definitions of the list's entries, such as Glossary of philosophical isms
The best format to use depends on which of the uses a list is being put to in any specific instance. If the list is being used primarily by those familiar with the subject, then an hierarchical list would be preferred. If used mostly by those not familiar with the topic, then an alphabetical list may be more useful. Possibly the best compromise is an annotated hierarchical list,which is helpful to both groups.
Other factors include whether the list is being used primarily for navigational purposes or for developing Wikipedia content (redlinks), and whether readers are mostly looking for a specific topic, a group of related topics, or just browsing.
Currently there is no single recommended format.
Lead and selection criteria
Lists should begin with a lead section that presents unambiguous statements of membership criteria. Many lists on Wikipedia have been created without any membership criteria, and editors are left to guess about what or who should be included only from the name of the list. Even if it might "seem obvious" what qualifies for membership in a list, explicit is better than implicit. Non-obvious characteristics of the list, for instance regarding the list structure, should also be explained in the lead section.
When deciding what to include on a list, ask yourself:
- If this person/thing/etc., wasn't an X, would it reduce their fame or significance?
- Would I expect to see this person or thing on a list of X?
- Is this person or thing a canonical example of some facet of X?
Ideally each entry on a list should have its own Wikipedia article but this is not required if it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future. The one exception is for list articles that are created explicitly because the listed items do not warrant independent articles: an example of this is List of minor characters in Dilbert.
If a complete list is feasible in 32K, and could be useful, go for a complete list. Otherwise, you need to make sure section editing is enabled or you may want to build a selected list.
It is useful to start each list with a sentence describing the content and scope of the list. For complete lists:
- This is a complete list of Xs.
For partial/selected lists:
- This is a selected list of Xs. Xs listed here should be (selection criteria).
When the list includes a short introduction and a longer list, it may be advisible to include the "See also" section, that shows related lists and articles, after the introduction and before the list.
Naming conventions
The name or title of the list should simply be List of _ _ (for example list of Xs). Do not use a title like: Xs, famous Xs, listing of important Xs, list of notable Xs, nor list of all Xs.
A list of lists of X could be at lists of X or list of X: e.g., lists of people, list of countries.
People are either list of Finns or list of French people, preferring List of _ people. USA folk are a special case; list of United States people redirects to lists of Americans, which is a disambiguation page containing, amongst other things, lists by US state. (Special treatment is necessary because American is ambiguous.)
Poets listed by language are at, for example List of German language poets - see list of poets.
Fictional creatures at list of fictional dogs, etc., with real-life examples at list of historical dogs. However for dragons and other fictional species, you can stick to the simple list of dragons.
If the list is part of a longer article, the page will use a regular article name, e.g. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, see Lists (embedded lists) for more.
For multi-page lists (aka "Long Lists"), see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (long lists).
Chronological ordering
Chronological lists, including all timelines and lists of works, should always be in earliest-to-latest chronological order. Special cases which specifically require frequent daily additions, such as Recent deaths, may use reverse chronological order for temporary convenience, although these articles should revert to non-reverse order when the article has stabilized, such as Deaths in 2003.
Appropriate topics for lists
The potential for creating lists is infinite. The number of possible lists is limited only by our collective imagination. To keep the system of lists useful, we must limit the number of lists.
Lists that are too general or too broad in scope have little value, unless they are split into categories. For example a list of brand names would be far too long to be of value. If you have an interest in listing brand names, try to limit the scope in some way (by product category, by country, by date, etc.). This is best done by sectioning the general page under categories. When entries in a category have grown enough to warrant a fresh list-article, they can be moved out to a new page, and be replaced by a See [[new list]] link. When all categories become links to lists, the page becomes a list repository or "List of lists" and the entries can be displayed as a bulleted list. For reference see Lists of people, which is made up of specific categorical lists.
Lists that are too specific are also a problem. The "list of one-eyed horse thieves from Montana" will be of little interest to anyone (except the person making the list).
Some Wikipedians feel that some topics are unsuitable by virtue of the nature of the topic. Following the policy spelled out in What Wikipedia is not, they feel that some topics are trivial, non-encyclopedic, or not related to human knowledge. If you create a list like the "list of shades of colours of apple sauce", be prepared to explain why you feel this list contributes to the state of human knowledge.
Lists of people
Selected lists of people should be selected for importance/notability in that category and should have Wikipedia articles (or the reasonable expectation of an article in the future). For example, list of Atheists doesn't include every individual with a Wikipedia article who happens to be an Atheist, because not all of them are notable for their Atheism. However, it might well include Sigmund Freud. See also Wikipedia:Notability (people).
An exception is nationality/ethnicity. List of Elbonians would include persons who are famous in any category and who belong to Elbonia. The criteria for identifying as an Elbonian may not depend on the official citizenship laws of that country - the person could be related to the place by birth, domicile, parents, or by his or her personal admission, consider himself or herself an Elbonian at heart.
Lists of people need to take into consideration Wikipedia's policy on biographical information about living people. For example, care must be taken when adding people to the list of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, and must be sourced reliably.
Lists of lists
Wikipedia has many lists of lists articles; list of lists is one such high-level article. On lists of lists, nonexistent lists should not be included. That is, all the links in a "lists of lists" should be active (blue, not red).
Lists of lists should also be available as alphabetical categories. Put lists that have actual content in one of the subcategories under Category:Lists.
As useful as lists are, certain may get out of date quickly; for these types of subjects, a category may be a more appropriate method of orgaization. See Wikipedia:Categorization and Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigational templates for more information on the appropriate times to use lists versus categories.
Lists and the "Related changes" link
A very useful Wikipedia feature is to use the "Related changes" link when on a list page. This will show you all the changes made to the links contained in the list. If the page has a link to itself, this feature will also show you the changes made to the list itself.