Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Klarer: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
<p>A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
<p>A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.


"Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is not, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.[1]
<br>"Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is not, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.[1]
Shortcut
Shortcut
WP:SIGCOV
WP:SIGCOV<?/br>
"Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
<br><b>"Significant coverage"</b> addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.
The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.
Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton,[2] that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.
Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton,[2] that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.</br>
"Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
<br><b>"Reliable"</b> means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.</br>
"Sources"[3] should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.[4] Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.
<br><b>"Sources"</b>[3] should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.[4] Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.</br>
"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.[5]</p>
<br><b>"Independent of the subject"</b> excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.[5]</p></br>


<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>

Revision as of 20:19, 20 March 2024

Nathan Klarer

I have included the notability guidelines below to ensure all editors understand and follow the guidelines. 2603:8080:2500:9F2:2DB0:1760:5043:A8F2 (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
"Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is not, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.[1] Shortcut WP:SIGCOV<?/br>
"Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM. Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton,[2] that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.

"Reliable" means that sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.

"Sources"[3] should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.[4] Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.

"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.[5]


[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Nathan Klarer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

BLP of a successful businessman lacking in depth coverage in reliable independent sources. There is nothing in this article to indicate that the subject meets our notability criteria. Mccapra (talk) 00:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nathan_Klarer&oldid=1214731967"