User:voorts/How the presumption of notability works

This is an essay on notability and the deletion policy.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

This essay in a nutshell:

The presumption of notability is an assumption that a topic is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia article. We assume that a topic is notable if it has received significant coverage in secondary and independent reliable sources.
The presumption is rebuttable; editors can show that it does not apply to a topic or that the topic does not otherwise warrant a Wikipedia article.
Before beginning the deletion process, the burden is on the editor who wants to delete the article to conduct a search and explain why the presumption does not apply.
During a deletion discussion, any editor who wants to keep an article must show that the topic is notable.

The general notability guideline creates a presumption of notability. The presumption (or assumption) is that topics that have significant coverage in independent, reliable sources should have a Wikipedia article written about it. Some topics have a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG). An SNG give examples of certain topics that are likely to have significant coverage in reliable sources. For example, the SNG for track-and-field athletes says that any athlete who "[has] a non-relay mark listed on the IAAF senior all-time list or equivalent list" is likely to have significant coverage written about them in independent, reliable sources.^[a]

The presumption of notability exists because the Wikipedia community has reached a consensus that significant coverage in independent, reliable sources usually indicates that a topic is worthy of note and because most things are not inherently notable. However, the presumption is just an assumption or rule of thumb, and so it can be rebutted. That means that any editor can show that it does not apply to a certain topic or that there should not be an article about that topic on Wikipedia. An editor usually shows that a topic is not notable through the deletion process.

Before beginning the deletion process, the editor who wants to delete an article (the "deleter") must first show that the presumption does not apply. During a deletion discussion, any editor arguing to keep an article (a "keeper") must show that it does. The deleter may also show that even if there is significant coverage in reliable sources, an article should not be created on a particular topic if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia's purposes.

The deleter is expected to conduct due diligence through a search for sources before proposing (via proposed deletion [PROD]) or nominating (at articles for deletion [AfD]) an article for deletion.^[b] A search showing a lack of sources meets the deleter's burden. Generally, when using PROD or at AfD, the deleter must explain that they conducted a search and explain why the sources that they found do not warrant applying the presumption.^[c]

Once a deletion discussion at AfD is started, the keepers usually must prove that a topic is notable or show that the deleters have not made a good argument for deletion.^[d] The keepers have that burden because information on Wikipedia, including a claim of notability, must be verified in reliable sources. The keepers can usually show that a topic is notable by explaining why there are enough reliable sources with significant coverage to write an article on the topic.

Notes[edit]

^ The SNGs for academics, creative professionals, geographic features, and politicians state that a topic is notable so long as it meets certain criteria. Some articles are commonly kept during deletion discussions, even if they do not meet any of the guidelines.
^ At a minimum, an editor should conduct "a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search", as well as a Google Scholar search for academic searches. Editors with extended confirmed user permissions are encouraged to use The Wikipedia Library.
^ In some cases, such as when a thorough search reveals only a few sources on a topic, the deleter may be able to prove that none of the existing sources that discuss the topic warrant application of the presumption of notability.
^ Removal of a PROD tag (de-PRODing) does not require proof of notability, or even an explanation.

[1] The SNGs for academics, creative professionals, geographic features, and politicians state that a topic is notable so long as it meets certain criteria. Some articles are commonly kept during deletion discussions, even if they do not meet any of the guidelines.

[2] At a minimum, an editor should conduct "a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search", as well as a Google Scholar search for academic searches. Editors with extended confirmed user permissions are encouraged to use The Wikipedia Library.

[3] In some cases, such as when a thorough search reveals only a few sources on a topic, the deleter may be able to prove that none of the existing sources that discuss the topic warrant application of the presumption of notability.

[4] Removal of a PROD tag (de-PRODing) does not require proof of notability, or even an explanation.

[a]

[b]

[c]

[d]

voorts
Creating stuff	Created articles log DYK log GAN nomination log FAC nomination log
Reviewing stuff	AfC log GAN review log GAR log FAC review log FAR log Important close log
Deleting stuff	CSD log Draftify log PROD log XfD log (Select XfDs)
Essays	How the presumption of notability works The spectrum of coverage
Talk about stuff Awards and stuff AWB alt

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]