Wikipedia:Inclusion is not an indicator of notability
 | This is an essay. 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. |
A common argument used against the deletion of certain articles is that other articles similar to the one in question exist. Because of the openness of Wikipedia it is nearly impossible to manage the flow of articles. The presence of similar articles does not necessarily validate the existence of other articles, and may instead point to the possibility that those articles also ought to be deleted. Inclusion is not an indicator of validity, notability, or quality due to the fact that any individual may edit a page. For example, if there are 20 garage bands that have articles on Wikipedia, it is not a valid indicator that any other garage band deserves an article.
Examining Wikipedia policy is more effective and practical than citing existing articles. Citing any article which has apparently survived unscathed does not necessarily validate that article's existence. This is due to the fact that Wikipedia is a growing, developing, and ever-changing body of work, and nothing within its realm can be taken for granted. The remaining constant throughout these changes is policy.
An editor nominating one article for deletion is under no obligation to search for and nominate related articles of a similar level of notability (though they often do). Inconsistent enforcement of the deletion policy is a problem which is not the responsibility of any single editor. If you think another article is of equal non-notability to one being considered for deletion, you are welcome to nominate that article as well, but please do not disrupt Wikipedia to make a point.
Conversely, non-inclusion is not an indication of non-notability. Since Wikipedia is continuously growing and expanding, new subjects and types of articles get included all the time. To suggest that a particular article is non-notable because no other similar articles exist would stunt the growth of Wikipedia, and do more harm than good.
A better argument at AfD
If editors fear that an article is being unfairly nominated for deletion, their arguments will carry more weight if they are couched in the notability guidelines or the relevant deletion precedent.
See also
- Wikipedia:Notability covers notability more generally.
- False equivalents (a non-essay)
- This essay most clearly identifies with deletionism. For the competing perspective, see inclusionism.