Wikipedia:WikiProject WikiFundi Content/Wikipedia:Notability

In Wikipedia, notability is a word that is used to explain what makes things important enough to be the subject of a Wikipedia article. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice". Notability is different from "fame", "importance", or "popularity", although these may affect it. A topic is thought to be notable enough to be the subject of an article if it meets the general guidelines below. If an article currently does not cite reliable secondary sources, that does not necessarily mean that its topic is not notable.

These notability guidelines are only about the encyclopedic suitability of topics for articles. They do not directly limit the content of articles. Relevant content policies include: Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons.

General notability guideline

If a topic has received important coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable.

• "Presumed" means if there is actual and real coverage in a number of independent reliable sources, then we presume the topic is notable.Non-notability is based only on a lack of suitable evidence of notability, and no longer applies once evidence is found. It is not possible to prove non-notability because that would require a negative proof. However, a subject that is presumed to be notable may still not be suitable for being included. For example, it may violate what Wikipedia is not. Remember, not all coverage in reliable sources is evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation. For example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories are all examples of coverage that may not actually support notability when examined, even though they exist as reliable sources.
• "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail. No original research is needed to find the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.An example is: 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 is plainly trivial.
• "Reliable" means sources need to be written truthfully and honestly to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may include published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability. Remember, self-promotion, autobiography, and product placement are not reliable sources for an encyclopedia article. The published works should be someone else writing independently about the topic. The test 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 about it. Otherwise, someone could give their own topic as much notability as they want by simply explaining it in detail outside of Wikipedia, which would defeat the purpose of the concept. Also, neutral sources should exist in order to guarantee a neutral article can be written — self-promotion is not neutral (obviously), and self-published sources often are biased even if they try not to be. Even non-promotional self-published sources, in the rare cases they may exist, are still not evidence of notability as they do not measure the attention a subject has received by the world at large.
• "Sources" can include but are 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, can be believed, and provides enough detail for a comprehensive article. defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the best evidence of notability. The number and type of reliable sources needed depends on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred. Remember, the lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic. Republications of a single source or news wire service do not always count as multiple works. Several journals publishing articles at the same time, in the same geographic region about an occurrence, does not always count as multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and just restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article within the same geographic region from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.* "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those linked with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.. Remember, works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large.

A topic for which this guideline has been met by agreement, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the guidelines for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article.

Notability guidelines for articles about people

Within Wikipedia, notability is guideline to see if an article should be included. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded". Notable in this instance is used in the sense of being "famous", or "popular"—although not irrelevant—is secondary.

This notability guideline for biographies also applies to small groups of closely related people such as families, co-authors, and co-inventors. It does not cover groups of unrelated people. This guideline is based on consensus reached through discussions and reinforced by established practice. It helps editors decide whether an article on a person should be written, merged, deleted or further developed.

In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article must actually show that the guidelines have been met. Evidence with references should be included.

These guidelines are about whether a person is notable enough for an article. Other relevant policies which can affect an article include:

• Neutral point of view
• Verifiability
• No original research
• What Wikipedia is not

Basic guideline

A person can be notable if he or she has been written about in many published works. The definition of what a "published work" is covers all types of publications. These published works must be reliable and independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

• Independent of each other - sources that are just copies of an original source can be used as references, but do not prove notability. "Intellectual independence" means that the content of sources must be different. Also if all of the content in a published work comes from (or based on) another work, it is not seen as a different source. For example, a speech by a politician about a particular person helps show the notability of that person, but copies of that speech by different news outlets do not. A biography written about a person helps show his or her notability. A summary of that biography without extra contributions does not.
• Independent of the subject - autobiography and self-promotion are not ways to get an encyclopaedia article. The test of notability is whether other people, not connected to the subject itself, think that the person is notable enough, and that they have written and published major works about it. Entries in biographical dictionaries that allow people to write about themselves, do not prove notability.
• If there is not a lot of coverage in any one source, then several independent sources may be combined to show notability. Trivial coverage of a person by secondary sources may not be enough to show notability. Non-triviality is a measure of the depth of content of a published work, and how far removed that content is from a simple directory entry or a mention in passing ("John Smith at Big Company said..." or "Mary Jones was hired by My University") that does not discuss the person in detail. A credible 200-page independent biography of a person that covers that person's life in detail is non-trivial. A birth certificate or a one line listing on an election ballot form is trivial. Database sources such as the Notable Names Database and Internet Movie Database are not considered credible since they are, like wikis, mass-edited with little oversight. These databases have much lower tests of notability.
• Primary sources may be used to prove content in an article. They do not prove the notability of a person.

Additional guidelines

People can be notable if they meet any of the following guidelines. Failure to meet these standards is not proof that a subject should not be included. Meeting one or more of the guideline does not guarantee that a subject should be included.

A person who fails to meet these additional standards may still be notable under Notability.

Any biography

1. The person has been given a well-known and significant award or honour, or has been nominated for one several times.
2. The person has made a widely recognised contribution that is part of the historical record in his or her specific field. Generally, a person who is "part of the historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in many books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. An actor who has been featured in magazines has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple magazine feature articles, by magazine article writers. An actor or TV personality who has "an independent biography" has been written about, in depth, in a book, by an independent biographer.

Biographies of living persons

Everyone must take extra care when changing pages with biographical material about a living person. Such content must have a high much care. The change must follow strictly all applicable laws in the country that person lives in and to the content policies of Wikipedia discussed above.

Pages about living persons must be made carefully, with care for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid paper or newspaper; it is not the writer's job to be sensationalist (Oh my! Look!), or to be the primary place for the spread of interesting claims about people's lives. The possibility of harm to living subjects is one of the important factors to be considered when writing an article. Do not include rumours unless you have written proof that they are true.

We must get the page right. Always use of high quality references. Heated, arguable, material about living persons that is unsourced (without references) or poorly sourced—even if the content is negative (bad), positive (good), or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.

Academics

Many scientists, researchers, philosophers and other scholars, known as "academics" are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources.

If an academic meets any one of the following guideline, with reliable sources=, they are notable.

1. The person's research has made significant impact in their area of study, as shown by independent reliable sources.
2. The person has received an important academic award or honour at a national or international level. Awards such as the Nobel Prize, MacArthur Fellowship, the Fields Medal, the Bancroft Prize, the Pulitzer Prize a national university prize, etc. means the person is notable.
3. The person is or has been an elected member of an important scholarly society or association (e.g. a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society) or a Fellow of a major scholarly society for which that is a highly selective honour (e.g. the IEEE)
4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.
5. The person holds or has held a named chair appointment or "Distinguished Professor" appointment at a major institution of higher education and research.
6. The person has held a major highest-level elected or appointed academic post at a major academic institution or major academic society.
7. The person has made substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.
8. The person is or has been an editor-in-chief of a major well-established academic journal in their subject area.
9. The person is in a field of literature (e.g. writer or poet) or the fine arts (e.g. musician, composer, artist), and meets the standards for notability in that art.

Athletes

Sports people are may be notable if they have:

1. participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level such as the Olympics.
2. won a national event of competition
3. played for a national team
4. played for a team in a national level competition

Creative people

Scientists, academics, economists, professors, authors, editors, journalists, movie makers, photographers, artists, architects, engineers, and other creative professionals:

1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
2. The person is known for starting a significant new concept, theory or technique.
3. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work. This work has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length movie, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
4. The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

Diplomats

Diplomats who have participated in a significant way in events of particular diplomatic importance that have been written about in reliable secondary sources. Sufficient reliable documentation of their particular role is required.

Entertainers

Actors, voice actors, comedians, opinion makers, models, and television personalities:

1. Has had important roles in several notable movies, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
2. Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
3. Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Politicians

1. Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (state-wide/province-wide) office.
2. Members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature. This is a secondary guideline. People who meet this guideline will almost always meet the main guidelines. Biographers and historians will usually have already written about the past and present holders of major political offices. However, this guideline makes sure that our coverage of major political offices, including all of the present and past holders of that office, will be complete. This will also apply to those who have been elected but not yet sworn into such offices.
3. Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. Generally speaking, mayors of cities of at least regional importance are likely to meet this criterion, as are members of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city.
4. Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the main guidelines of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article".

In the case of candidates for political office who do not meet this guideline, the general rule is to redirect to an appropriate page covering the election or political office sought in lieu of deletion. Relevant material from the biographical article can be merged into the election or political office page if appropriate. Deleting a biography in these cases instead of just redirecting it makes recovering useful information from the page history difficult, and should be done only when there are relevant reasons other than lack of notability for removing the article from the mainspace.

Invalid standards

• Just because person A has a relationship with well-known person B, a spouse or child for example, is not a reason for a separate article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A). However, person A may be included in the related article on B. For example, Brooklyn Beckham and Jason Allen Alexander are included in the articles on David Beckham and Britney Spears, respectively. The links to Brooklyn Beckham and Jason Allen Alexander, are just redirects to those articles.
• Standards based on search engine statistics (e.g., Google hits or Alexa ranking, or measuring the number of photos published online. Search engines cannot easily tell the difference between useful references and just text matches. When using a search engine to help establish the notability of a topic, measure the quality, not the quantity, of the links.

People notable for only one event

When an individual is significant for his or her role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether or not to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and the degree of significance of the individual's role within it should be considered. The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person. However, as both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles become justified.

If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate. The assassins of major political leaders, such as Gavrilo Princip, fit into this category, as indicated by the large coverage of the event in reliable sources that devotes significant attention to the individual's role.

When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, an independent article may not be needed, and a redirect is appropriate. For example, George Holliday, who videotaped the Rodney King beating, redirects to Rodney King. On the other hand, if an event is of sufficient importance, even relatively minor participants may require their own articles, for example Howard Brennan, a witness to the JFK assassination.

Another issue arises when an individual plays a major role in a minor event. In this case, it is not generally appropriate to have an article on both the person and the event. Generally in this case, the name of the person should redirect to the article on the incident, especially if the individual is only notable for that incident and is all that that person is associated with in source coverage. For example, Steve Bartman redirects to Steve Bartman incident. In some cases, however, a person famous for only one event may be more widely known than the event itself, for example, the Tank Man. In such cases, the article about the event may be most appropriately named for the person involved.

Lists of people

Many articles include lists or are just lists of people. People included on lists should meet the notability standards above. Every person in any such list needs a reliable source which shows that the person is a member of the listed group.

For example, articles about schools often include (or link to) a list of notable alumni. These lists are not meant to list every graduate of the school—only those with verifiable notability. On the other hand, a list within an article of past school presidents can contain all past presidents, not just those who are independently notable.

Family

Being related to a notable person in itself does not make a person notable.