Wikipedia:Notability

WP:NOTE redirects here. You may also be looking for WP:CITE, WP:NOT or Wikipedia:Footnotes

Notability is defined by a set of article inclusion criteria based on encyclopedic suitability. The topic of any article should be notable, which means it is "worthy of notice". This is a concept distinct from "fame" or "importance". A subject is presumed to be notable if it meets the criteria below, or if it meets one of the agreed subject specific standards in the table to the right, which lists guidelines in specific fields.

These guidelines pertain to the suitability of article topics but do not directly limit the content of articles.

General notability criteria

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject and each other.

• "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 less than exclusive.Template:Fn
• "Sources" should be independent. Multiple sources are strongly preferred, but not necessarily required. The number needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources.Template:Fn
• "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 are a good test for notability.Template:Fn
• "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.Template:Fn
• "Independent of each other" means intellectually independent sources based on independent research. Template:Fn

Articles not satisfying this guideline

If an article doesn't assert or demonstrate notability, try to improve it by one of the following methods:

• Improve it yourself
• Ask the article's creator for advice.
• Put the {{notability}} tag on the article to notify other editors.
• 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.
• Merge it into a broader article providing context

If the article can not be improved or is clearly not an appropriate subject for Wikipedia choose one of the following methods:

• 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 Wikipedia: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.

Notability is generally permanent

If a topic has independent reliable published sources, this is not changed by the frequency of coverage decreasing. Thus, if a topic once satisfied the general notability guidelines, it continues to satisfy it over time. The reverse is not true; subjects may acquire notability as time passes. However, articles should not be written based on speculation that the subject may be notable in the future.

Other factors that may influence the notability of topics in the context of Wikipedia include the fact that policy and guidelines and consensus can change over time.

Notability is not popularity

Popularity does not by itself render a subject notable, nor does lack of popularity render it non-notable. For example, popular Internet fads may be the subject of few or no reliable sources and fail to be notable, but a rather obscure seventeenth-century poet may have substantial coverage in reliable histories qualifying the subject as notable. Secondary source availability and depth of coverage, not popularity or fame, establishes notability.

Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content

Notability guidelines give guidance on whether a topic is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia as a separate article, but do not specifically regulate the content of articles, which is governed by other guidelines such as those on using reliable sources and on trivia. It is not required that each particular topic or fact within an article meet the standard of the notability guidelines. However, list articles are expected to include only notable entries; for example, only notable writers should be in List of English writers.

See also

Essays related to notability:

• Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions - An essay arguing against the use of subjective criteria such as "I like it" and "I don't like it"
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes - Summary of common outcomes from AfD discussions giving context to precedents.
• Wikipedia:Independent sources - An essay explaining further why independent sources are needed to write an encyclopedia article.
• Wikipedia:Notability/Arguments - A list of arguments for both application and non-application of notability.

Notes

• Template:Fnb 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.
• Template:Fnb Several journals simultaneously publishing articles about an occurrence, does not always constitute independent works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.
• Template:Fnb 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. Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic.
• Template:Fnb Self-promotion, autobiography, and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. The published works should be someone else writing about the topic. (See Wikipedia:Autobiography for the attributability and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material. Also see Wikipedia:Independent sources.) 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.
• Template:Fnb Some examples:
  • Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) recommends that individual articles on minor characters in a work of fiction be merged into a "list of minor characters in ..." page.
  • Wikipedia:Notability (schools) recommends that individual articles on schools where there are no non-trivial published works from sources other than the school itself be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located, or into articles on the school districts, education authorities, or other umbrella school organizations as appropriate.
  • Non-prominent relatives of a famous person tend to be merged into the article on the person, and articles on persons who are only notable for being associated with a certain event tend to be merged into the main article on that event.
  • An article on a band that doesn't satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability (music) criteria may be merged into the biography of a notable band member.
• Template:Fnb In other words, the only discussion of the topic is in published works from sources that are not independent of the subject, such as autobiographies.
• Template:Fnb Wikipedians 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 infomation which would demonstrate notablility in an other manner.