Wikipedia:Penting @ Dikenali
Dari Wikipedia Bahasa Melayu, ensiklopedia bebas.
- "WP:NOTA" beralih ke sini . Anda mungkin juga ingin mencari WP:PETIKAN, WP:TIDAK or WP:KAKI.
- "WP:RELEVEN" akan menghala ke sini. Anda mungkin juga ingin mencari Wikipedia:Hanya membuat pautan yang releven kepada konteks atau Wikipedia:Releven kepada konteks.
 |
This page is considered a garis panduan penting atau dikenali on Wikipedia. It is a generally accepted standard that all editors should follow. However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. |
Templat:Nutshell
Templat:IncGuide Di dalam Wikipedia, penting @ dikenali merupakan penyertaan satu kriteria yang berdasarkan kesesuaian satu tajuk ensiklopedia bagi satu artikel Wikipedia. Tajuk sesuatu artikel seharusnya dikenali, atau "nilai untuk dikenali". Konsep ini adalah berlainan daripada "masyhur", "kepentingan", or "populariti", walaupun semua ini mempunyai korelasi positif dengan 'boleh dikenali' . Satu tajuk dikatakan adalah cukup boleh untuk dikenali sekiranya ia selari dengan garis panduan untuk menjadikan artikel ini dikatakan 'boleh dikenali' seperti di bawah, atau jika ia selari dengan satu perkara yang memenuhi piawai yang spesifik kepada jadual di sebelah kanan.
These notability guidelines only pertain to the encyclopedic suitability of topics for articles but do not directly limit the content of articles. Relevant content policies include: Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons.
Senarai kandungan |
[sunting] General notability guideline
A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
- "Presumed" means objective evidence meets the criteria, without regard for the subjective personal judgments of editors.[1] Substantive coverage in reliable sources suggests that the subject is notable.[2]
- "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.[3]
- "Reliable" means 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. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject are a good test for notability.[4]
- "Sources,"[5] defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.[6]
- "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.[7]
A topic for which this criterion is deemed to have been met by consensus, is usually worthy of notice, and satisfies one of the criteria for a stand-alone article in the encyclopedia. Verifiable facts and content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for inclusion within another article.
[sunting] Notability requires objective evidence
The common theme in the notability guidelines is the requirement for verifiable objective evidence to support a claim of notability. Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence, as do published peer recognition and the other factors listed in the subject specific guidelines.
[sunting] Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines
If an article fails to cite sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of its subject, look for sources yourself, or:
- Ask the article's creator for advice on where to look for sources.
- Put the {{notability}} tag on the article to alert other editors. To place a dated tag, put a {{subst:dated|notability}} tag.
- If the article is about a specialized field, use the {{expert-subject}} tag with a specific WikiProject to attract editors knowledgeable about that field, who may have access to reliable sources not available online.
If appropriate sources cannot be found, consider merging the article's content into a broader article providing context.[8] Otherwise, if deleting:[9]
- If the article meets our criteria for speedy deletion, one can use a criterion-specific deletion tag listed on that page.
- Use the {{prod}} tag, for articles which do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, but are uncontroversial deletion candidates. This allows the article to be deleted after five days if nobody objects. For more information, see Wikipedia:Proposed deletion.
- For cases where you are unsure about deletion or believe others might object, nominate the article for the articles for deletion process, where the merits will be debated and deliberated for 5 days.
[sunting] Notability is not temporary
A short burst of present news coverage about a topic does not necessarily constitute objective evidence of long-term notability.[10] Conversely, if long-term coverage has been sufficiently demonstrated, there is no need to show continual coverage or interest. Topics that did not meet the notability guidelines at one point in time may meet the notability guidelines as time passes and more sources come into existence. However, articles should not be written based on speculation that the topic may receive additional coverage in the future.
[sunting] Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content
Notability guidelines give guidance on whether a topic is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia as a separate article, but do not specifically regulate the content of articles (other than list articles). Article content is governed by other policies and guidelines, such as the policy requiring Verifiability and the guidelines covering the use of reliable sources and of trivia sections . The particular topics and facts within an article are not each required to meet the standards of the notability guidelines.
[sunting] Lihat juga
Esei-esei yang berkaitan dengan Bolehdikenali:
- Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions - An essay arguing against the use of subjective criteria such as "I like it" and "I don't like it"
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes - Summary of common outcomes from AfD discussions giving context to precedents.
- Wikipedia:Independent sources - An essay explaining further why independent sources are needed to write an encyclopedia article.
- Wikipedia:Notability/Arguments - A list of arguments for both application and non-application of notability.
- User:Uncle G/On notability - An exemplar arguing in favor of specific notability criteria
- Wikipedia:Non-notability/Essay - An exemplar of a dissenting view to notability arguments
- User:Hiding/What notability is not - An essay on notability within Wikipedia
[sunting] Notakaki
- ↑ Non-notability is a rebuttable presumption based only on a lack of suitable evidence of notability, which becomes moot once evidence is found. It is not possible to prove non-notability because that would require a negative proof.
- ↑ However, many subjects presumed to be notable may still not be worthy of inclusion – they fail What Wikipedia is not, or the coverage does not actually support notability when examined. For example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, minor news stories, and coverage with low levels of discrimination, are all examples of information that may not be evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation, despite their existence as reliable sources.
- ↑ Examples: The 360-page book by Sobel and the 528-page book by Black on IBM are plainly non-trivial. The one sentence mention by Walker of the band Three Blind Mice in a biography of Bill Clinton (Martin Walker. "Tough love child of Kennedy", The Guardian, 1992-01-06. ) is plainly trivial.
- ↑ Self-promotion, autobiography, and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article. The published works should be someone else writing independently about the topic. (See Wikipedia:Autobiography for the attribution and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material. Also see Wikipedia:Independent sources.) The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it.
- ↑ Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc. In the absence of multiple sources, it must be possible to verify that the source reflects a neutral point of view, is credible and provides sufficient detail for a comprehensive article.
- ↑ Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic. Mere republications of a single source or news wire service do not always constitute multiple works. Several journals simultaneously publishing articles in the same geographic region about an occurrence, does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article within the same geographic region from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.
- ↑ Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large. See also: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for handling of such situations.
- ↑ For instance, articles on minor characters in a work of fiction may be merged into a "list of minor characters in ..."; articles on schools may be merged into articles on the towns or regions where schools are located; relatives of a famous person may be merged into the article on the person; articles on persons only notable for being associated with a certain group or event may be merged into the main article on that group or event.
- ↑ Wikipedia editors have been known to reject nominations for deletion that have been inadequately researched. Research should include attempts to find sources which might demonstrate notability, and/or information which would demonstrate notability in another manner.
- ↑ See Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information; #5 News reports. The Wikimedia project Wikinews does cover topics receiving a short burst of present news coverage.
Templat:Wikipedia policies and guidelines
