Notability WikipediaEdit
Notability on Wikipedia is the gatekeeping principle that determines whether a topic deserves its own article. At its core, the standard asks for significant, reliable, independent coverage of a subject. It is not about popularity or momentary fuss, but about enduring relevance that can be verified by credible sources beyond the subject itself. This approach is meant to preserve a stable, useful repository of knowledge rather than a crowded index of every passing rumor or self-promotional claim.
In practice, notability applies across a wide range of topics—persons, organizations, events, and works of culture or science. Each category has its own tests, but they share the same aim: ensure that an entry reflects something that has lasting value in reliable public discourse. The requirement for independence means sources should be outside the subject and not controlled by it or its promoters. The framework sits alongside other core encyclopedia principles such as Verifiability and Neutral point of view, guiding what is included and how it is presented. Topics that fail the notability bar risk deletion or consolidation, which is not a suppression of information so much as a safeguard against clutter and misrepresentation.
Main criteria and guidelines
Core standard: significant coverage in reliable, independent sources
- The central test is whether a topic has been the subject of sustained reporting or analysis by credible outlets, major reference works, or peer‑reviewed research. Coverage should not be confined to a single promotional piece, anonymous blog, or a local flyer. See Notability for the formal criteria and how they are interpreted across different domains.
- Examples include bipartisan political figures who appear in multiple major outlets, enduring scientific topics with a body of peer‑reviewed literature, or organizations that have played a notable role in public life. For example, an article about Barack Obama would meet notability through extensive, independent coverage; a regional club with only a couple of mentions would not.
Living persons and the Biographies of living persons guideline
- Notability for living individuals is typically more demanding, because claims can affect reputation and privacy. Articles about living people generally require substantial coverage from reliable, independent sources and must avoid speculative or sensational material. See Biographies of living persons for the safeguards and standards that accompany these entries.
Notability for organizations and companies
- An organization earns notability when it has a recognized impact, governance structure, or documented activities covered by independent sources. This helps prevent promotional pages for companies or groups that lack public interest beyond their own announcements. See Notability (organizations) for topic-specific tests and examples.
Notability for events
- An event must have broad coverage that goes beyond a single chronicle of occurrence. It should be discussed in multiple independent outlets or reference works and have lasting significance beyond the initial news cycle. See Notability (events) for the standard benchmarks.
Notability for works (creative, scholarly, or scientific)
- Books, films, studies, and other works are typically notable if they have been the subject of sustained critical attention, scholarly analysis, or widespread discussion in reputable sources. See Notability (creative works) and Verifiability for how criticism and reception are weighed.
Local and niche topics
- Topics with regional importance or specialized interest can be notable if they have received credible coverage from independent sources beyond local publicity. This often requires coverage by regional outlets, academic work, or references in broader publications. See Local topics and Notability for nuances on how local significance is evaluated.
Editorial process and safeguards
- Notability interacts with the editor community’s standard workflows, including discussion on talk pages and the possibility of article deletion through processes like Articles for deletion when consensus is not reached. See Wikipedia:Notability for policy context and common procedures.
Case orientation and examples
- A topic like a major policy initiative with extensive, independent evaluation would likely be notable, whereas a short-lived fad or a rumor without reliable corroboration would not. The framework emphasizes that lasting significance, not novelty, drives inclusion.
Debates and perspectives
Gatekeeping and editorial balance
- Proponents of the notability framework argue it protects readers from low‑quality material and preserves a stable base of trustworthy information. Critics claim the guidelines can be used to exclude topics of interest to minority communities or niche intellectual currents. From a practical standpoint, the aim is to balance openness with responsibility—allowing broad participation while guarding against vanity pages and misinformation.
Local and regional coverage
- Critics sometimes push for broader recognition of locally significant topics, arguing that notability should acknowledge real-world impact even when national or international attention is limited. Supporters respond that local significance is legitimate but must be anchored in independent, reliable coverage that demonstrates lasting interest beyond a single locale. The solution is to expand what counts as reliable local coverage while maintaining the standard that sources be independent of the subject.
Bias and editor demographics
- There is ongoing discussion about whether the panel of active editors reflects a representative cross-section of society. Some argue that systemic bias in sources and contributor pools can influence what gets recognized as notable. Advocates for reform emphasize clearer criteria, more transparent deletion discussions, and broader inclusion of scholarly and professional sources to diversify coverage without surrendering standards.
Controversial topics and accountability
- Notability interacts with sensitive or controversial topics by demanding careful sourcing and balanced presentation. Proponents say the framework prevents sensationalist or unverified claims from gaining unwarranted prominence, while critics may fear it suppresses legitimate but contested discussions. In practice, editors are urged to document sources and present well-rounded perspectives, while relying on accepted secondary literature rather than sensational primary materials.
Notable considerations for readers and editors
Significance over popularity
- The emphasis on lasting impact and credible sourcing means that a topic should matter beyond a single event or trend. This helps readers rely on a compact, stable set of articles that reflect verified knowledge rather than the volatility of online attention.
Reliability of sources
- The standard privileges independent and reputable sources, including established newspapers, academic journals, and reference works. Self-published material, promotional content, or sources lacking editorial oversight are weighed cautiously or excluded.
Balance with diverse voices
- While notability seeks to avoid trivial pages, it also recognizes that not all topics of public interest are equally visible in mainstream outlets. When credible, independent coverage exists, even about less widely discussed subjects, they can merit an entry.
Curation and evolution
- Notability is not a fixed verdict but a dynamic standard. Articles can be expanded, refined, or deleted as new reliable sources appear or as understanding of a topic shifts. See Articles for deletion as part of the ongoing governance process.