Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There have been many Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion debates over the years. This page summarizes how various types of articles, subjects, and issues have often been dealt with on AfD, offering quick, easy-to-follow indications to users who are new to the deletion process.
For an archive of this page, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precedents/Archive.
|
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Citing in AFD
Please note that this page is a basic, summarized guide on consensus established in AfD debates, and that consensus can change. Revisions and updates of these basic precedents should be made accordingly. For rules, guidelines, and consensus on a more detailed basis, visit the various notability policy pages instead (see template right).
Precedents defined here should be used with caution — using this essay as the sole argument in an AFD is disputed at best, as there can be conflicts with extant policies or guidelines. As these are not binding policies, the fact that a precedent exists should not be interpreted as prima facie evidence that a particular topic is entitled to an article, but neither should the fact that it's only a precedent, not an actual policy, be taken as sufficient grounds to simply ignore the precedent. Do take precedents into account, but articles should still be evaluated on their merits and their conformance to standard content policies such as WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NPOV.
If you feel that the precedent does not apply, then give a reason why it shouldn't apply — the fact that it's only a precedent does not validate WP:ONLYGUIDELINE as a deletion argument. And if your article fits in with these precedents but is still being challenged on notability grounds, try to improve the article rather than falling back on WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS — the precedents here do not necessarily legitimize bad or unsourced articles about potentially valid topics.
[edit] General notability guideline
- Further information: Wikipedia:Notability
A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. However, there is still a lot of debate on notability, as for obvious reasons, not every person, business, or street can be considered notable, so on such topics, the line has to be further drawn.
[edit] Companies
- Further information: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)
- Blatant advertising pages are subject to speedy deletion; however please consider whether the descriptions of products are just advertising or pertinent to explaining the function of the organization. Please consider whether the article includes past & present products, as the inclusion of both might indicate a legitimate purpose.
- Products that have been planned but not created yet, are not generally acceptable. See WP:CRYSTAL. However, exceptions include "future-tech" items, e.g., fusion reactors, and prominent products in development such as the next Apple Inc. operating system.
- Companies reported as significant subjects of news coverage are usually sufficiently notable.
- Local retailers and service merchants (franchises or individually owned) are generally not acceptable, with exceptions, including first-of-a-kind businesses (e.g. the first motel), those centered around a major historical event, or tourist attractions.
Note: There are some informative concerns expressed at the Discussion Page which may help you in evaluating the notability of companies.
[edit] Education
- Further information: Wikipedia:Schools
- Further information: Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities/Article guidelines
- Schools are frequently nominated for deletion, but consensus is frequently not reached. Most of the approximately 270 school articles nominated for deletion in the eight months January to August 2005, resulted in no consensus, while fewer than 15% have actually been deleted. Most elementary and middle schools that don't claim notability are now getting deleted in AfD, with high schools in most cases being kept. Schools which do get deleted are frequently, although not always, redirected to the school district which operates them.
- School teachers, clubs, classrooms or lessons are not notable.
- Classes are not notable (but they are usually about a notable subject, e.g., psychology).
- Professors (in the American sense of the word) tend to be kept and deleted in about equal numbers. Generally, tenured professors at major research institutions and top liberal-arts colleges tend to be kept, while assistant professors without major awards are deleted (see WP:PROF).
- Students are generally not notable (see WP:BIO).
- Departments or degree programs within a university, college, or school are not notable unless they have made significant contributions to their field (e.g., University of Chicago Department of Economics), or produced a number of notable graduates (USC School of Cinematic Arts, Oxford PPE).
- The notability of student unions may vary between different counties and different universities. A case-by-case demonstration of notability for each student union should be the prime determining factor in each AfD. (Refer to WP:UNIGUIDE#Student life for specifics)
- WP:REDIRECT is a guideline that allows short articles to be merged into larger, possibly more notable parent articles. This is a viable solution for short articles about elementary schools rather than cluttering up AfD which averages 120-130 new and concurrent debates per day.
[edit] Entertainment
- Many celebrities are notable; see Wikipedia:Notability (people).
- Family members of celebrities should generally be merged with the articles about celebrities themselves, unless:
- The family member meets notability requirements themselves, eg. Ashlee Simpson and Jessica Simpson; not Dina Lohan.
- If such a subsection in the main article becomes large and unwieldy, then a separate article may become valid, although the section should also be reviewed for trivia before a separate article is actually written.
- Licensed radio and TV stations are notable if they broadcast over the air and originate at least a portion of their programming schedule in their own studios. Lower power radio stations limited to a small neighborhood, such as Part 15 operations in the United States or stations with a VF# callsign in Canada, are not inherently notable, although they may be kept if some real notability can be demonstrated. Stations that only rebroadcast the signal of another station should be redirected to their programming source (e.g. CICO-TV is a redirect to TVOntario.)
- Internet radio stations are notable if they can demonstrate a clear and verifiable cultural notability or influence. AOL Radio and WOXY, for instance, are clearly notable, but your own personal Peercast stream with three listeners is not.
- Satellite radio channels on XM, Sirius or WorldSpace may be acceptable, but if they merely relay an existing conventional broadcast service such as Fox News or Deutsche Welle, then the satellite service should be written about as part the existing service's article rather than as a separate article.
- Television series broadcast nationally by a major network or produced by a major studio are notable.
[edit] Internet
- Further information: Wikipedia:Notability (web)
- Communities, message boards and blogs are generally not notable
- Flash animations are generally not notable, unless they are extremely well-known
- Programming languages are acceptable if widely used; Google is an indicator of reliable sources - see Wikipedia:Search engine test
- Webcomics are not to be judged purely on the length that they have run. See WP:WEB for other suggested notability criteria.
- Notability of internet phenomena is widely disputed.
[edit] Lists
- Lists and categories have different uses, and lists nominated for overlapping categories are often kept.
[edit] Literature
- Published authors are notable if they have received multiple independent reviews of or awards for their work, or if their work is likely to be very widely read.
- Books are notable if well-known, and should be listed under the author if not
- Characters from books should be compiled to lists per book, unless a large amount of information is written on a character. See WP:FICT.
- Locations in books follow the same guidelines as characters, see above
- Fanfic is generally not notable
- Poems and other literary texts themselves belong in WikiSource if copying them there does not violate copyright
[edit] Music
- Further information: WP:MUSIC
- Bands and musicians are notable if they have have been written about non-trivially by multiple sources
- Albums can be notable in and of themselves, but please provide the name of the band, and more info than a mere tracklist; alternatively, list them on the band article
- Untitled, unreleased albums very rarely pass WP:CRYSTAL, and are often deleted — however, once a title and track listing have been confirmed by the artist or their record label for an upcoming release, an article on the album is not a WP:CRYSTAL violation if the information is properly referenced to reliable sources.
- Band members should generally be listed under the band, rather than in a separate article, unless the person can be deemed notable for his/her independent accomplishments
- Lyrics belong in WikiSource, unless they are copyright violations
- Songs are not generally notable, and should be listed under album or artist as appropriate. Songs which have been verifiable Top 40 hits do, however, tend to survive AFD, although not without dissent.
- Shows and tours of bands should be listed in the band article, not in a separate article
[edit] People
- Further information: Wikipedia:Notability (people)
- Athletes: Wrestlers in tiny wrestling leagues are not notable.
- Spelling bee winners: Winners of well-known national spelling bees (like Scripps or CanSpell) may be notable. The typical winner of a local spelling bee is not.
- Municipal politicians: Municipal politicians are not inherently notable just for being in politics, but neither are they inherently non-notable just because they're in local politics — evaluate each case on its own individual merits. Mayors of major cities have usually survived AFD, although the article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville". Mayors of smaller towns, however, are generally deemed not notable just for being mayors, although they may be notable for other reasons in addition to their mayoralty.
- Similarly, city councillors are not automatically notable, although precedent has tended to favour keeping members of the main citywide government of major, internationally famous metropolitan cities such as Toronto, Chicago, San Francisco or London. Note, however, that this does not necessarily include borough councillors. Candidates for municipal election are not inherently notable just for their candidacy; these should only have articles if they already meet other criteria for inclusion.
- Notwithstanding the above two criteria, municipal politicians who (a) represent a historic first, such as the first woman, first person of colour or first LGBT person elected to a municipal government, or (b) have received national or international press coverage for acting as a spokesperson on a major political issue or for breaking the law, may also be sufficiently notable. Having been covered only in local media does not generally satisfy the "significant press coverage" criterion for notability, however.
- Candidates for a national legislature are not viewed as having inherent notability. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonia Bance (second nomination). However, such candidates are permitted inclusion in a merged list of candidate biographies, such as New Democratic Party candidates, 2004 Canadian federal election. (Note, however, that some dissent may be expressed if the election campaign in question is currently underway — however, dissent has also been engineered on occasion by the candidate's own campaign office, so monitor this for potential sockpuppetry.) Also, review the whole article before nominating it for deletion, as the person may be legitimately notable for other reasons, such as having previously held another elective office. The fact that the incumbent has an article is not, in and of itself, a valid reason to keep articles on electoral opponents who have not already achieved notability — Wikipedia is not a campaign tool.
- A leader of a duly-registered political party at the state, provincial or federal levels, however, is notable regardless of that party's degree of electoral success, although a bare stub should probably be redirected to the party's article until more can be written about the person than the mere fact that they led a political party.
- Business persons: Presidents, Chief Executive Officers, and Chairmen of the Board of companies listed in the Fortune 500 (US) or the FTSE 100 Index (UK) have been found to be sufficiently acceptable.
[edit] Geography
- Geological features named on maps, such as Willow Creek Pass (Montana), are verifiable and so acceptable.
- City streets are contested, but minor streets are not generally acceptable. Most numbered roadways are acceptable, but should only be created if they can be described beyond the route itself. Major, unnumbered streets and roads beyond the level of a side street or neighborhood roadway may be created, but are not guaranteed to remain, as outcomes have varied. An article that explains the social, cultural, historical or political context of a road in depth is more likely to survive AFD than one which merely describes the road's physical characteristics.
- Unless a structure is demonstrably historic (like the Eiffel Tower) or otherwise serves an important function to a wide population (such as structures with rotating restaurants, publicly accessible observation decks), stub articles of utilitarian radio and television masts which are only referenced in the FCC database are generally deleted. They have also sometimes been redirected to the relevant tenant radio or TV station, or list of tallest structures in the world.
- Asteroids and comets are acceptable e.g. List of asteroids, List of non-periodic comets, and List of periodic comets.
[edit] Places
- Further information: Wikipedia:Places of local interest
- Attractions and landmarks are potentially acceptable; however, touristic information should be listed on WikiTravel
- Bars, pubs, cafes and hotels should be listed on WikiTravel, unless multiple sources have written about them in detail
- Cities and villages are acceptable, regardless of size
- Larger neighborhoods are acceptable, but its name must have verifiable widespread usage
- Smaller suburbs should generally be listed under the primary city article, except when they consist of legally separate municipalities or communes (e.g., having their own governments)
- While the acceptability of large malls is in dispute, strip malls and individual shops are not generally acceptable. Some articles on large town centers have survived AFD or been merged.
[edit] Transportation
- Subway and railway lines are acceptable, but individual stations are questionable. A dedicated bus rapid transit line, such as Ottawa's Transitway, is also acceptable, but a regular bus line that travels along normal city streets is not notable and should usually be at most a redirect to the city transit company that operates it. However, some articles about bus lines in major cities have survived AFD — articles that describe the line's history and social impact for at least several decades are more likely to be acceptable.
- Further information: Wikipedia:Notability (Railway lines and stations)
- Bus stops are not notable, with the exception of certain hubs in major cities
- In the U.S., state and interstate highways (aka: freeways, turnpikes, expressways and motorways) are acceptable. In Canada, any highway that is part of a province's or territory's official highway system is acceptable.
- Highway exits should be listed in an article on a highway, not as a separate article, except for some highly notable ones (e.g. the Springfield Interchange near Washington, D.C.).
- County roads are disputed, but may be kept if genuine fame or notability can be demonstrated. If the notability claim boils down to "it's notable because it exists", however, then redirection to a single merged list of that county's numbered roads is more appropriate.
[edit] Tips on dealing with other material
- A copyright violation, or copyvio, should be blanked and tagged with {{copyvio}}, and the instructions on it followed.
- Dictionary articles
- If the article can be refactored into a viable encyclopedia article, do so and add a {{stub}} tag.
- If not, it belongs in Wiktionary; add a {{copy to wiktionary}} tag.
- Foreign language texts need translation; add a {{notenglish}} tag.
- However, try a foreign Google search, or a Babel Fish translation, to see if the article is meritable; if not, mark it for deletion.
- Guidebooks and how-to texts belong in Wikibooks; add a {{copy to wikibooks}} tag.
- Recipes belong in Wikibooks; add a {{copy to wikibooks}} tag.
- Neologisms are only acceptable if they have been documented as neologisms in depth. See Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms
- Quotes belong in wikiquote
- Lists of words (e.g. Latin words in the English language) belong in wiktionary
- Gibberish - tag with {{nonsense}}.
- Test pages (e.g. "Hello, does this edit thingy work?") should be deleted, add a {{db-test}} tag.
- Inherently POV articles (e.g. "Best songs ever") should be deleted.
- Sometimes, a variant page with an objective criterion (e.g. "Songs that have been #1 hits") can be created.
- Attack pages (e.g. "John Doe is a moron!")
- Often these were good articles that were vandalized; check the 'history' tab
- If not, they can be speedily deleted; add a {{db-attack}} tag.
