Knowledge

:Credible claim of significance - Knowledge

Source 📝

34: 232:
For example, if the new article contains just one line: "John Doe is a fitness trainer", the initial view might be that there is no claim of significance. But if the sources in the same article discuss the subject, chances are, more coverage may exist; and in this case too, the A7, A9 and A11 tags
228:
If there is no evident claim of significance in the article, check the references provided within the article (which is the second way that is listed in the section above). If the references within the article discuss the subject or provide a possible claim of significance, then the A7, A9 and A11
328:, since it is very likely to be true, and since the song "Popular Song" would likely be covered in multiple reliable sources. While this page might make a credible claim of significance, it is possible that Alice might still not be any more notable for Knowledge's 200:
The existence of such a statement of noteworthiness/importance/significance within the article would generally ensure that the A7, A9 and A11 tags cannot be applied. Such a claim of noteworthiness need not be supported by any reference; the fact that such a claim
268:
assuming that the claim were indeed true, could this (or something that "this" might plausibly imply) cause the subject (possibly with other plausible information added) to be notable? Or, does it give plausible indications that research might well discover
373:
A claim of significance need not be self-evidently true, but should not be blatantly false. A blatant hoax, or a claim so improbable that no one of sound mind would believe it, is not a plausible claim of significance — use the {{db-hoax}} template to tag
404:
You may find an article that contains a credible claim of significance, but which you think doesn't belong in Knowledge. In such cases, do not send the article through the CSD process for these criteria. Instead, consider these options:
140:
if they don't make a "credible claim of significance or importance" (among other requirements specific to each criterion). Wikipedians have often struggled with this aspect of these criteria, and may ask, what does it mean?
441: 391:, such associations can still be considered significant if they meet point #6 above. Also, articles on non-notable subjects that are closely related to a subject that is notable can often still be 171: 384:
Any statement which plausibly indicates that additional research (possibly offline or in specialized sources) has a chance of demonstrating notability is a claim of significance.
176:
When assessing an article for such a claim (the first way described above), you should search for a statement within the article that attributes noteworthiness to the subject.
223: 152:
secondary sources may itself be an indication of significance, not including any sources is entirely irrelevant to an assessment under these speedy deletion criteria.
466: 451: 472: 19: 193: 42: 517: 155: 446: 212:
and not John Doe who is the President of the country of Wiki-Zeland), the article may be tagged for speedy deletion as a hoax (
46: 512: 117:
is a statement in the article that attributes noteworthiness, or information written about the subject in reliable sources.
456: 461: 233:
should generally not be applied (except when it's clear that this is the only coverage that this subject will ever get).
424: 352:
A claim of significance need not be supported by any cited sources, much less by inline citations to reliable sources.
18:"WP:Significance" and "WP:SIGNIF" redirect here. For the now-historical Significance guideline in use until 2006, see 54: 358:
Therefore, a claim of significance need not pass any of the general or specialized notability guidelines, such as
417: 53:
This page provides additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of
58: 377:
Any statement which, if reliably sourced, would be likely to persuade some of the commentators at a typical
288:
would most certainly have coverage in multiple reliable sources. However, this claim of course fails part
410: 208:
At the same time, if the claim is evidently false (for example, if initial research confirms that it is
428: 522: 355:
A claim of significance need not amount to a statement that, if sourced, would establish notability.
527: 90: 388: 306:, since it's very-well plausible for this claim to be true. However, it would not pass part 160:
A credible claim of significance can be assessed in an article with two different methods:
23: 97: 8: 344:
The following list below contains important points to keep in mind about the meaning of
76: 83: 68: 110:
Explanatory essay about the several sections of Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion
253:. A good mental test is to consider each part discretely when evaluating an article: 145: 442:
Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as importance or significance not asserted
363: 133: 129: 125: 486: 485:
Remember, even though A7, A9, and A11 are off-limits, editors can still opt to
217: 506: 494: 490: 392: 378: 367: 359: 333: 329: 300:"Jane Doe graduated from their High School as the top student of their class" 149: 137: 121: 399: 339: 213: 292:
of the two-part test, since it is absolutely not plausible to be true.
493:
if they believe that the article, despite its claim, is not broadly
284:
of the two-part test, since a person that's officially named as the
236: 164:
a statement in the article that attributes noteworthiness, or
310:, since the claim is highly unlikely to lead to notability. 435: 318:"Alice is an artist that composed the song 'Popular Song'" 189:"The John Doe recording debuted at #5 on Billboard charts" 167:
information written about the subject in reliable sources.
469:– a list of common indicators for significance/importance 183:"John Doe is the President of the country of Wiki-Zeland" 179:
For example, look for sentences that say things such as:
260:
is the claim being made reasonably plausible to be true?
205:
deems that the A7, A9 and A11 tags cannot be applied.
467:
Knowledge:Common claims of significance or importance
186:"John Doe was the first cricketer to bat left-handed" 22:. For Knowledge's current notability guideline, see 504: 452:Knowledge:Field guide to proper speedy deletion 381:to keep the article is a claim of significance. 192:"The invention of the Wiki-transporter won the 172:A claim is asserted in the article (method one) 473:User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to A7 156:Identifying a credible claim of significance 20:Knowledge:Notability/Historical/Significance 194:National Medal of Technology and Innovation 280:. This claim would certainly satisfy part 224:Research of reliable sources (method two) 245:is a two-part test: The claim has to be 302:. This claim would of course pass part 505: 447:Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion 144:Significance is a lower standard than 47:Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion 320:. This claim likely passes both part 457:Knowledge:Over-hasty Speedy Deleters 389:notability generally isn't inherited 28: 462:Knowledge:Knowledge is not censored 416:nominating it for deletion via the 409:nominating it for deletion via the 13: 216:), or alternatively have deletion 59:thoroughly vetted by the community 55:Knowledge's policies or guidelines 14: 539: 379:articles for deletion discussion 136:state that certain pages can be 32: 518:Knowledge essays about deletion 332:, and thus still be deleted at 479: 368:biography notability guideline 286:actual King of the planet Mars 278:"John Doe is the King of Mars" 243:credible claim of significance 115:credible claim of significance 45:about the several sections of 1: 489:for articles or take them to 513:Knowledge supplemental pages 497:and should still be deleted. 360:general notability guideline 229:tags should not be applied. 7: 10: 544: 66: 17: 148:. While the inclusion of 425:alternatives to deletion 423:implementing any of the 249:, and it also has to be 203:exists and has been made 418:articles for deletion 334:articles for deletion 330:notability guidelines 393:merged or redirected 24:Knowledge:Notability 395:instead of deleted. 57:as it has not been 429:proposing a merger 427:methods, such as 411:proposed deletion 400:What happens next 340:Pitfalls to avoid 108: 107: 43:explanatory essay 535: 523:Knowledge essays 498: 487:propose deletion 483: 364:music notability 138:speedily deleted 100: 93: 86: 79: 36: 35: 29: 543: 542: 538: 537: 536: 534: 533: 532: 528:Speedy deletion 503: 502: 501: 484: 480: 438: 402: 342: 239: 226: 174: 158: 122:speedy deletion 111: 104: 103: 96: 91:WP:SIGNIFICANCE 89: 82: 75: 71: 63: 62: 33: 27: 12: 11: 5: 541: 531: 530: 525: 520: 515: 500: 499: 477: 476: 475: 470: 464: 459: 454: 449: 444: 437: 434: 433: 432: 421: 414: 401: 398: 397: 396: 385: 382: 375: 371: 356: 353: 348:on Knowledge: 341: 338: 271: 270: 262: 261: 238: 235: 225: 222: 198: 197: 190: 187: 184: 173: 170: 169: 168: 165: 157: 154: 109: 106: 105: 102: 101: 94: 87: 80: 72: 67: 64: 52: 51: 39: 37: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 540: 529: 526: 524: 521: 519: 516: 514: 511: 510: 508: 496: 492: 488: 482: 478: 474: 471: 468: 465: 463: 460: 458: 455: 453: 450: 448: 445: 443: 440: 439: 430: 426: 422: 419: 415: 412: 408: 407: 406: 394: 390: 386: 383: 380: 376: 372: 369: 365: 361: 357: 354: 351: 350: 349: 347: 337: 335: 331: 327: 323: 319: 315: 311: 309: 305: 301: 297: 293: 291: 287: 283: 279: 275: 267: 264: 263: 259: 256: 255: 254: 252: 248: 244: 237:Two-part test 234: 230: 221: 219: 215: 211: 206: 204: 195: 191: 188: 185: 182: 181: 180: 177: 166: 163: 162: 161: 153: 151: 147: 142: 139: 135: 131: 127: 123: 118: 116: 99: 95: 92: 88: 85: 81: 78: 74: 73: 70: 65: 60: 56: 49: 48: 44: 38: 31: 30: 25: 21: 16: 481: 403: 346:significance 345: 343: 325: 321: 317: 313: 312: 307: 303: 299: 295: 294: 289: 285: 281: 277: 273: 272: 265: 257: 250: 246: 242: 240: 231: 227: 209: 207: 202: 199: 178: 175: 159: 143: 120:Knowledge's 119: 114: 112: 40: 15: 420:process, or 269:notability? 251:significant 41:This is an 507:Categories 146:notability 387:Although 324:and part 241:The term 124:criteria 98:WP:SIGNIF 69:Shortcuts 436:See also 413:process, 247:credible 218:proposed 210:Jane Doe 150:reliable 495:notable 314:Example 296:Example 274:Example 77:WP:CCOS 374:those. 214:CSD G3 84:WP:CCS 366:, or 132:and 491:AFD 134:A11 509:: 362:, 336:. 316:: 298:: 276:: 266:B. 258:A. 220:. 196:". 130:A9 128:, 126:A7 113:A 50:. 431:. 370:. 326:B 322:A 308:B 304:A 290:A 282:B 61:. 26:.

Index

Knowledge:Notability/Historical/Significance
Knowledge:Notability
explanatory essay
Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion
Knowledge's policies or guidelines
thoroughly vetted by the community
Shortcuts
WP:CCOS
WP:CCS
WP:SIGNIFICANCE
WP:SIGNIF
speedy deletion
A7
A9
A11
speedily deleted
notability
reliable
National Medal of Technology and Innovation
CSD G3
proposed
notability guidelines
articles for deletion
general notability guideline
music notability
biography notability guideline
articles for deletion discussion
notability generally isn't inherited
merged or redirected
proposed deletion

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.