PeaceDeadC (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
PeaceDeadC (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
|
Because these requirements are based on major content policies, they apply to all articles, not solely articles justified under the [[PBC:GNG|general notability criteria]]. They do not, however, apply to pages whose primary purpose is navigation (e.g. all [[PBC:Disambiguation|disambiguation]] pages and [[PBC:LSC|some lists]]).
== Common circumstances ==
=== <span id="SPIP" ></span>Self-promotion and publicity ===
{{Shortcut|PBC:SPIP}}
Publication in a reliable source is not always good evidence of notability. [[PBC:Promotion|PBC is not a promotional medium]]. Self-promotion, autobiography, product placement and most [[PBC:Paid editing|paid material]] are not valid routes to an encyclopedia article. 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—without incentive, promotion, or other influence by people connected to the topic matter.
Independent sources are also needed to guarantee a [[PBC:NPOV|neutral article]] can be written; see [[PBC:Autobiography]] for discussion of neutrality concerns of self-published sources. Even non-promotional self-published sources, like technical manuals that accompany a product, are still not evidence of notability as they are not a measure of the attention a subject has received.
=== {{anchor|SBST}}Events ===
{{shortcut|PBC:SBST}}
{{main|PBC:Notability (events)}}
[[PBC:NOTNEWS|PBC is not a news source]]: it takes more than just routine news reports about a single event or topic to constitute significant coverage. For example, routine news coverage such as press releases, public announcements, sports coverage, and [[Tabloid journalism#To refer to sensationalist journalistic practices|tabloid journalism]] is not significant coverage. Even a large number of news reports that provide no critical analysis of the event is not considered significant coverage.
=== Stand-alone lists ===
{{Shortcut|PBC:NOTESAL|PBC:LISTN}}
{{Further|PBC:Manual of Style (stand-alone lists)#Selection criteria}}
{{See also|PBC:Manual of Style/Lists#Adding individual items to a list}}
Notability guidelines also apply to the creation of stand-alone lists and tables. Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed {{em|as a group or set}} by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a [[PBC:SALAT|stand-alone list]]. The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the {{em|group or set}} is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, although editors may, at their discretion, [[PBC:LSC|choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with PBC articles]].
There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists, although [[PBC:What_PBC_is_not#Non-encyclopedic_cross-categorizations|non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations]] are touched upon in [[PBC:What PBC is not]]. Lists that fulfill [[PBC:LISTPURP|recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes]] often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. Editors are still urged to demonstrate list notability via the grouping itself before creating stand-alone lists.
== Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines ==
{{Shortcut|PBC:FAILN}}
Topics that do not meet this criterion are not retained as separate articles. Non-notable topics with closely related notable articles or lists are often ''merged'' into those pages, while non-notable topics without such merge targets are generally deleted.
If an article fails to cite sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of its subject, look for sources yourself, or:
* Ask the article's creator or an expert on the subject<ref>Sometimes contacting the subject of a biography or the representative of a subject organization will yield independent source material. Of course we have to be careful to observe and evaluate independence.</ref> for advice on where to look for sources.
* Place a {{tl|notability}} tag on the article to alert other editors.
If appropriate sources ''cannot be found'' after a good-faith search for them, consider [[PBC:Merging|merging]] the article's verifiable content into a broader article providing context.<ref>For instance, articles on minor characters in a work of fiction may be merged into a "list of minor characters in{{nbsp}}..."; articles on schools may be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located; relatives of a famous person may be merged into the article on the person; articles on persons only notable for being associated with a certain group or event may be merged into the main article on that group or event.</ref> Otherwise, if deleting:<ref>PBC editors 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 information which would demonstrate notability in another manner.</ref>
* If the article meets our [[PBC:Criteria for speedy deletion|criteria for speedy deletion]], one can use a criterion-specific deletion tag listed on that page.
* Use the {{tl|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 seven days if nobody objects. For more information, see [[PBC:Proposed deletion]].
* For cases where you are unsure about deletion, believe others might object, or another editor has already objected to a previous proposed deletion, nominate the article for the [[PBC:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]] process, where the merits will be debated and deliberated for seven days.
For articles on subjects that are ''clearly'' not notable, then deletion is usually the most appropriate response, although other options may help the community to [[PBC:PRESERVE|preserve any useful material]].
| |||
edits