Disposition: Active and stable Essay, so heavily relied upon at WP:AFD and other XfDs that it should probably be tagged a Guideline. at its " What about article x?" and " It's useful/important" sections). WP:AADD (August 2006 – present) – Multi-topic essay on just what it says, including various fallacious notability and non-notability arguments (e.g. Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions a.k.a. These issues have mostly been ironed out as of the late 2010s, though some subject-specific notability guidelines retain language that appears to suggest they supersede WP:N's general notability guideline ( WP:GNG), causing sporadic debate. May conflict with Wikipedia:Deletion policy's recognition of several, more subjective subject-specific notability criteria as actionable for article deletion. Disposition: Active and stable Guideline (was Disputed and under heavy revision, while designated a guideline, ca. WP:N (September 2006 – present) – Attempts to define "notability" objectively, as having multiple, independent reliable sources. No issue on Wikipedia has seen more debate, nor perhaps more heated debate, than some variation on notability as a dividing line on whether to allow or delete an article.īelow is a list of most if not all of the Wikipedia-wide guideline/policy proposals, and development-influential essays, relating to notability in some way or another, with their active development lifespan, and notes. The concept of notability of the subject of an article as a deletion criterion on Wikipedia began (so far as there is a clear record) in early 2004, and has varied widely from proposal to proposal, from highly subjective concepts like "fame" or "importance", through incomprehensible ones like "actionability", to, finally, today's stable and more objective notability criterion – which still has its critics.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |