From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Essay on editing Wikipedia
| This page in a nutshell:
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.
|
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is
verifiability
. It is broadly accepted among editors that the minimum level of verifiability is
"significant coverage in
reliable sources
that are
independent
of the subject"
. Wikipedia defines this process for a topic to become a stand-alone article as
notability
, and provides a
general guideline
to determine if the article should be included in Wikipedia. In addition to this general notability guideline, additional guidelines have been created that give further guidance on notability for specific topics. This essay attempts to state the views of a significant number of editors, about when and when not to create these additional notability guidelines, and what they should and should not contain. This essay could be referred to when disputes arise about the content of currently existing notability guidelines.
Please note that this essay fully complies with the guidelines for writing guides about guidelines.
Notability sub-pages are guidelines for editors on the criteria for specific classes of topics to become stand-alone articles in Wikipedia. They should only be created and proposed if and when a specific need arises. They can be used to perform the following functions:
- To provide additional information on notability as it relates to a specific topic. For example, in some instances it may not be clear how the criteria of the general notability guideline relates to a specialised topic, in which specialised published sources exist. Guidelines such as this should concentrate on what exactly is included in the definition of a
secondary source
.
- To define inclusion criteria that are more restrictive than the general inclusion criteria. Note that there is no general consensus governing such criteria. See the section entitled
Restrictive inclusion criteria
, below, for more information regarding this.
In general, notability guideline sub-pages should:
- 1.
Clearly state the intended purpose of the guideline, and why it is required
.
- Notability guidelines for a specific topic should only be created when the need arises. The guideline should clearly outline this need. A guideline that is not designed to meet a specific need, would be an example of
instruction creep
(see image on right), and should not be created at all. Additional notability guidelines that amount to nothing more than a rewording of the general notability guideline also fall into this category.
- 2.
Specify inclusion criteria that are dependant on the general notability criteria
.
- The guideline should ensure that it is not in conflict with the minimum requirements of notability, as defined by the
general notability guideline
. As stated previously, it is broadly accepted among editors that the criteria defined in the general notability guideline must be met in order to comply with Wikipedia's policy of verifiability. Additional guidelines should not set an inclusion criteria that is less restrictive than this.
In general, notability guideline sub-pages should not:
- 1.
Define inclusion criteria that are less restrictive than the general notability guideline
.
- See above.
- 2.
Attempt to define policy that is not already in practice
.
- The purpose of a guideline is to document current practice, not to invent new policy.
- 3.
Contain arbitrary values
.
- Example:
"A religious figure is notable if they are mentioned 5 or more times in central scripture"
.
- Inclusion criteria must be based on logical reasoning. An arbitrary value, in contrast, is simply a number that the author thought was a good idea at the time.
There is some support among Wikipedia editors for the creation of additional notability guidelines for specific topics that are more restrictive than the general notability guideline. For example, some Wikipedians feel that minor league baseball players are not notable enough for inclusion, even if they meet the notability requirements of the general notability guideline. This is more an argument of
importance
rather than
verifiability
. It should be noted that there is no Wikipedia policy requiring importance, and there is no general consensus on the issue. If you feel there is a need for such restrictive inclusion criteria in a guideline you wish to propose, then add it. But bear in mind that the proposed guideline may be rejected for this reason.
|
---|
|
|
|
|
---|
- Adminitis
- Akin's Laws of Article Writing
- Alternatives to edit warring
- ANI flu
- Anti-Wikipedian
- Anti-Wikipedianism
- Articlecountitis
- Asshole John rule
- Assume bad faith
- Assume faith
- Assume good wraith
- Assume stupidity
- Assume that everyone's assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming good faith
- Avoid using preview button
- Avoid using wikilinks
- Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense
- Barnstaritis
- Before they were notable
- BOLD, revert, revert, revert
- Boston Tea Party
- Butterfly effect
- CaPiTaLiZaTiOn MuCh?
- Complete bollocks
- Counting forks
- Counting juntas
- Crap
- Don't stuff beans up your nose
- Don't-give-a-fuckism
- Don't abbreviate "Wikipedia" as "Wiki"!
- Don't delete the main page
- Editcountitis
- Edits Per Day
- Editsummarisis
- Editing Under the Influence
- Embrace Stop Signs
- Emerson
- Fart
- Five Fs of Wikipedia
- Seven Ages of Editor, by Will E. Spear-Shake
- Go ahead, vandalize
- How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
- How to get away with UPE
- How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angle
- How to vandalize correctly
- How to win a citation war
- Ignore all essays
- Ignore every single rule
- Is that even an essay?
- Mess with the templates
- My local pond
- Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them
- Legal vandalism
- List of jokes about Wikipedia
- LTTAUTMAOK
- No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man
- No one cares about your garage band
- No one really cares
- No, really
- No sorcery threats
- Notability is not eternal
- Oops Defense
- Play the game
- Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you
- Please bite the newbies
- Please do not murder the newcomers
- Pledge of Tranquility
- R-e-s-p-e-c-t
- Requests for medication
- Requirements for adminship
- Rouge admin
- Rouge editor
- Sarcasm is really helpful
- Sausages for tasting
- The Night Before Wikimas
- The first rule of Wikipedia
- The Five Pillars of Untruth
- Things that should not be surprising
- The WikiBible
- Watchlistitis
- Wikipedia is an MMORPG
- WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG!
- What Wikipedia is not/Outtakes
- Why not create an account?
- Yes legal threats
- You don't have to be mad to work here, but
- You should not write meaningless lists
|
|
|
|
---|
About essays
| |
---|
Policies and guidelines
| |
---|
|
|