Wikipedia:Historical archive/Policy/Notability/Notability changes

Overview

This is a proposal to explicitly make "notability" a requirement for Wikipedia articles, and to explicitly include "lack of notability" as a reason for deleting articles.

Proposal

Specifically, this proposal is to add text to the following pages:

A) to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not:

Wikipedia is not for articles about non-notable subjects Although there is debate about just what makes a subject notable, there is a consensus that a subject must be in some way significant, important, or notable for it to be a proper subject of an encyclopedic article. Articles on completely trival subjects, even if accurate and verifiable, are not appropriate.

B) to Wikipedia:Deletion policy

Problem with page	Solution	Add this tag
* Is about a non-notable subject (see WP:NOT)	List on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:AFD)	{{subst:afd}}

(Note: this actually adds text only to the one cell in the first column of the existing table, the headers and the cells in the other columns are to make it clear exactly where the text is to be added.)

C) in Wikipedia:Notability

Replace It has been argued that lack of "notability" is not a criterion for deletion, because (among other things) this isn't specifically stated in the deletion policy; and since Wikipedia is not paper with (in theory) no size limits, there's no reason why wikipedia shouldn't include "everything" that fits in with our other criteria

with Notability is generally deemed an important criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia (see WP:NOT), as it is one aspect of the requirement that an article be encyclopedic. Thus it complements our other criteria

Procedure

1. This proposal will require 75 percent support ("Support" choices in a poll) to pass.
2. Votes by users who are not logged in will be discounted, as will votes cast by any user that had less than 50 edits when this vote started.
3. The wording of this proposal will be fixed when the poll has opened. Please do not edit this page, but discuss changes on the talk page.
4. When the poll has opens it will take place on the /poll page
5. The poll will close 2 weeks after it opens.

Arguments

Pro

• Many people already act on the assumption that notability is a requirement for inclusion on wikipedia. it is frequently cited as a reason for deletion on WP:AFD, it has been formalized as a reason for speedy deletion in at least one case (see WP:CSD#Articles point 7).
• WP:NOT already says: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not mean it is suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. and Subjects of encyclopedia articles must have a claim to fame besides being fondly remembered by their friends and relatives. and Biography articles should only be for people with some sort of fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety. and Individual scheduled or expected future events, should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. WP:VAIN asks us to consider if a person is "noteworthy".
• Most importantly, Wikipedia:Five pillars (which is neither a policy nor a guideline) says Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. This means that articles must be encyclopedic. From this follows our requirement of the Neutral Point of View, and of verifiability. From this it also follows that articles should be about notable topics. While the degree of notability required may be debated, completely trivial topics do not belong in an encyclopedia, even one that is not paper.

Con

• Notability is too subjective – there is never a consensus on what is or isn't notable in any given field.
• Notability is just an excuse for "I haven't heard of it so delete it." Most of the people that nominate or vote on articles are not experts in the field in question, so this creates an exposure that valid content could be deleted.
• Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. There is room for articles on any and every verifiable subject. Wikipedia is several times larger than any paper encyclopedia, so there is room for topics that would never appear in a paper encyclopedia.
• Using notability as a criterion for deletion as opposed to verifiability is much less polite to new users who write about obscure things or themselves.

Discussion

Please discuss this proposal on the talk page.