Wikipedia discussions |
---|
Arguments to avoid in |
Arguments to make |
Common outcomes |
Subjective importance is when a subject is perceived as being notable by seeming important or appearing to stand out to a person or group of people. A common misconception about notability is that importance or uniqueness equals notability. But some things that are assumed to be important lack sources that are required by Wikipedia in order to meet the general notability guidelines or other inclusion criteria. Therefore, they are not included.
A subject may be the biggest, the best, or the most well-known of something. It may be possible on this basis to argue that it should obviously be included. But without a single reliable source to verify its existence or accuracy, there is no way it can be included.
For example, a high school basketball player may be the best on their team. A pizza shop may serve the most popular pizza in town. A church may be the oldest place of worship in the region. These facts may be well known to those most familiar with these subjects. But there may be nothing published about any of this that can be used as sources for the basis of an article.
Also, certain factors that are viewed as respectable by society are likewise not automatic grounds for notability. The world has many physicians who have studied hard and save lives. But most of these physicians are relatively unheard of in published sources and are not worthy of articles. Likewise, the principal of a school or the founder of a club do not get automatic articles for their achievements.
Factors that do not automatically render notability
There are many reasons why one may believe something is notable when they are not. In many cases, these have been used in arguments to keep an article proposed for deletion, and they sometimes have worked.
Age
- Keep He is the oldest living person in the country right now – Own A Title, 14:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep This store has been around for 105 years – Hand-me-down, 17:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep This house was built over 1300 years ago – Restored, 21:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Just because it's old, that doesn't mean it's notable.
Age is just a number, and numbers are not used to judge notability on Wikipedia. Everything and everyone has an age, and with each passing day, that age is increased by one day. That age will continue to increase as long as the person is alive, or the object still exists. At what time will that person or object be ready for an article?
If a structure that is still standing is thousands of years old, and there is a name put to it, it is likely that there will be multiple independent reliable sources ("MIRS"), about it, though these must be provided in order for the article to be written. The same goes if it has been verified to be the oldest example in existence. But there cannot possibly be an article about every living tortoise or tree on planet earth.
The older something is, the more difficult published sources can be to locate. Sources for subjects that existed before the days of the internet are more likely to be offline. While there is no requirement that sources be available online, they must be verifiable. The more clearly you cite an offline source, the less likely it is to be challenged. Remember, the burden is on the editor adding the material to provide sufficient sources.
Popularity
- Keep It is the best-selling brand – Keeping up with the Joneses, 06:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep It is a game everyone plays – Challenge me, 06:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Keep It is a favorite recipe – Mmmmmmmmmmmmm, 06:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
There are many things that have reached the status of one of the above examples, yet they have never been covered in any published source, and they are nothing more than word-of-mouth. Word-of-mouth is not only insufficient for Wikipedia notability, but it may also be original research.
There are sites, such as Urban Dictionary, that more readily accept entries without proof, taking the word of the submitter as enough to make it plausible. This, in theory, can allow anyone to pass off their own creation as something long in existence. The main point of the notability guideline is to provide objective criteria for inclusion rather than subjective criteria such as importance which depend on an individual's perspective on the subject.