188:
secondary sources. If we had criteria which granted notability status to certain reliable sources, then that would permit
Knowledge (XXG) to serve primary information about those sources to Knowledge (XXG) readers who wanted whatever context was available on those sources. This would encourage deeper understanding about the reliability of Knowledge (XXG) articles. It also would be the origin of new challenges which the Knowledge (XXG) community does not currently have infrastructure or planning to address.
196:"Notability" is the term for judging whether Knowledge (XXG) will have an article on a subject. "Reliable source" is the term for judging whether Knowledge (XXG) will summarize and cite information from that source. There is not necessarily any overlap between these concepts. However, as Knowledge (XXG) has expanded as a publication, it has come to happen that the Knowledge (XXG) community has judged some sources to be reliable (and valid) while judging those same
31:
98:
282:
This situation is out of scope for this documentation. It is presented here to acknowledge and dismiss it. This could be another issue for a guide other than this one. Also, eventually
Knowledge (XXG) will seek to summarize sources which are popular off-wiki, but the more pressing current problem is
387:
However, Wikidata's own notability criteria are more inclusive than
Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria. Wikidata welcomes all of the information that Knowledge (XXG) could possibly present based on primary sources. Wikidata also has its own quality control process for this information and eventually will
407:
This would be complicated. Knowledge (XXG) itself cannot publish original research so publication would have to happen in another venue. This is a terribly tedious and unorthodox research direction which is why it is so uncommon and unpopular. There is no obvious audience for publishing on this
187:
Knowledge (XXG) community members agree that filling articles with primary source material is problematic and undesirable. However, there has always been agreement that some primary information is useful so long as a topic meets notability criteria and that we combine it with information from
403:
Knowledge (XXG) editors could either conduct or arrange to do research and publication on the sources which
Knowledge (XXG) cites. Journal editors would probably give interviews. University students or research departments might collaborate with the wiki community to do publication.
330:
The status quo is that the topic of an individual reliable source does not merit a
Knowledge (XXG) article, no matter how Knowledge (XXG) cites that source, until and unless anyone demonstrates that it passes usual criteria in the usual way.
286:
This documentation all raises the issue of assigning notability to sources on the basis of their off-wiki popularity. The consensus is that
Knowledge (XXG) should not assign notability to non-notable topics based on off-wiki use.
391:
Anyone who wants to get started building out information about reliable sources may do so presently in
Wikidata. If and when this information becomes welcome in some way in Knowledge (XXG), then it would be easy to transfer.
183:
This creates a situation where
Knowledge (XXG) is publishing and circulating the name of a publication as authoritative, but is not also able to provide readers with additional context about that publication.
370:
Small-town regional newspapers might not be popular in general, but could be essential as sources for that region. These sources could be key citations already used in 50+ Knowledge (XXG) articles.
179:- Knowledge (XXG) editors are citing the source in Knowledge (XXG) articles either broadly in many articles, perhaps 1000s, or deeply in some articles, perhaps for a narrow field
270:
BroadwayWorld.com is a database for theatre productions. As of August 2018 about 6000 Knowledge (XXG) articles cite this database. The publication itself is not notable
17:
271:
423:
264:
153:
which
Knowledge (XXG) editors cite. This document considers assigning notability to sources on the basis of their importance as citations in Knowledge (XXG).
417:
306:
291:
258:
400:
Knowledge (XXG) does not have strong precedents of soliciting original journalism or research. However, this could become a
Knowledge (XXG) activity.
170:
459:
342:
The Knowledge (XXG) community sometimes designates special notability criteria to grant notability recognition to topics which do not pass the
122:
216:
Without a Knowledge (XXG) article, Knowledge (XXG) readers and editors cannot easily determine the source metadata, including the following:
429:
296:
50:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
127:
51:
334:
In this view the Knowledge (XXG) community does not need to make any plans to share information about sources unless they are notable.
163:- A source meets Knowledge (XXG)'s reliable source guidelines and is appropriate to cite and summarize in Knowledge (XXG) articles
464:
243:
213:
Imagine that 1000 Knowledge (XXG) articles are citing a particular source which itself does not have a Knowledge (XXG) article.
200:
as subjects which are not notable. This problem increases as more Knowledge (XXG) articles contain references to those sources.
373:
Special interest journals might be used in 50+ Knowledge (XXG) articles on a topic but not of interest outside that niche field
439:
434:
301:
367:
There is an in-Knowledge (XXG) consensus among experienced editors that a source is especially important for a niche topic
384:
There are no plans in place or scheduled development to use Wikidata information to address this Knowledge (XXG) problem.
150:
454:
131:
116:
356:
A publication has printed more than 1,000,000 words (about 4000 paper pages) of original human written prose
349:
Here are some example criteria which the Knowledge (XXG) community could designate as conferring notability:
146:
110:
43:
55:
283:
providing context to Knowledge (XXG) readers for the sources which Knowledge (XXG) is using right now.
65:
106:
39:
156:
Consider the situation where the Knowledge (XXG) community is in agreement about the following:
343:
173:
or any specialized notability criteria, so is not eligible for a Knowledge (XXG) article
448:
317:
There are no special notability criteria for reliable sources proposed at this time.
58:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
16:"WP:NRS" redirects here. For the statement about Knowledge (XXG)'s reliability, see
235:
Tie between the publication and either its publisher or the publisher's owner
321:
Options for developing Knowledge (XXG) articles for reliable sources
119:
on how notability may be interpreted within their area of interest.
420:- Knowledge (XXG) cites academic journals but many are not notable
261:- Knowledge (XXG) cites academic journals but many are not notable
254:
These are the cases which are most relevant to Knowledge (XXG).
97:
92:
25:
396:
Solicit third-party publication to make these topics notable
426:- Knowledge (XXG) cites newspapers but many are not notable
362:
6-12 page local near-daily newspapers do this in 5-15 years
267:- Knowledge (XXG) cites newspapers but many are not notable
353:
More than 1000 Knowledge (XXG) articles cite a publication
18:
Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) is not a reliable source
338:
Create special notability criteria to pass these topics
80:
73:
115:
It contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more
229:
For-profit, noncommercial, or government affiliations
346:. We could develop criteria to apply in this case.
272:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/BroadwayWorld
169:- This same source as a topic does not itself meet
359:80-page monthly magazines do this in about 5 years
424:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Newspapers/Notability
278:Source is highly cited outside of Knowledge (XXG)
265:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Newspapers/Notability
145:is the application of Knowledge (XXG)'s rules on
313:Special notability criteria for reliable sources
418:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academic journals)
388:have all this information as structured data.
307:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academic journals)
292:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject YouTube/Notability
259:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (academic journals)
246:has been surfacing some of this information.
8:
380:Develop the Wikidata items for this topics
232:Identity of editors behind the publication
250:Source is highly cited in Knowledge (XXG)
430:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (periodicals)
297:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (periodicals)
52:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
244:d:Wikidata:WikiProject Source MetaData
7:
128:Knowledge (XXG) policy or guideline
440:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (books)
435:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (media)
302:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (media)
132:thoroughly vetted by the community
56:thoroughly vetted by the community
14:
96:
29:
23:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
171:WP:General notability guideline
143:Notability of reliable sources
1:
460:WikiProject notability advice
177:Important in Knowledge (XXG)
481:
465:Knowledge (XXG) notability
326:No Knowledge (XXG) article
63:
44:Knowledge (XXG):Notability
15:
226:Institutional affiliation
242:In Wikidata since 2014
455:Knowledge (XXG) essays
130:, as it has not been
54:, as it has not been
238:Related publications
209:General description
151:WP:Reliable sources
223:Country of origin
220:Age of the source
204:Problematic cases
140:
139:
91:
90:
472:
167:Fails notability
126:is not a formal
123:This information
100:
93:
83:
76:
33:
32:
26:
480:
479:
475:
474:
473:
471:
470:
469:
445:
444:
414:
398:
382:
340:
328:
323:
315:
280:
252:
211:
206:
194:
161:Reliable source
136:
135:
87:
86:
79:
72:
68:
60:
59:
30:
24:
21:
12:
11:
5:
478:
476:
468:
467:
462:
457:
447:
446:
443:
442:
437:
432:
427:
421:
413:
410:
397:
394:
381:
378:
377:
376:
375:
374:
371:
365:
364:
363:
360:
354:
339:
336:
327:
324:
322:
319:
314:
311:
310:
309:
304:
299:
294:
279:
276:
275:
274:
268:
262:
251:
248:
240:
239:
236:
233:
230:
227:
224:
221:
210:
207:
205:
202:
193:
190:
181:
180:
174:
164:
138:
137:
120:
103:
101:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
69:
64:
61:
49:
48:
36:
34:
22:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
477:
466:
463:
461:
458:
456:
453:
452:
450:
441:
438:
436:
433:
431:
428:
425:
422:
419:
416:
415:
411:
409:
405:
401:
395:
393:
389:
385:
379:
372:
369:
368:
366:
361:
358:
357:
355:
352:
351:
350:
347:
345:
337:
335:
332:
325:
320:
318:
312:
308:
305:
303:
300:
298:
295:
293:
290:
289:
288:
284:
277:
273:
269:
266:
263:
260:
257:
256:
255:
249:
247:
245:
237:
234:
231:
228:
225:
222:
219:
218:
217:
214:
208:
203:
201:
199:
191:
189:
185:
178:
175:
172:
168:
165:
162:
159:
158:
157:
154:
152:
148:
147:WP:Notability
144:
133:
129:
125:
124:
118:
114:
112:
108:
102:
99:
95:
94:
82:
78:
75:
71:
70:
67:
62:
57:
53:
47:
45:
41:
35:
28:
27:
19:
406:
402:
399:
390:
386:
383:
348:
341:
333:
329:
316:
285:
281:
253:
241:
215:
212:
197:
195:
186:
182:
176:
166:
160:
155:
142:
141:
121:
117:WikiProjects
104:
37:
105:This is an
38:This is an
449:Categories
192:Background
111:notability
81:WP:NSOURCE
46:guideline.
66:Shortcuts
412:See also
408:topic.
198:sources
149:to the
42:on the
344:WP:GNG
74:WP:NRS
107:essay
40:essay
109:on
451::
134:.
113:.
20:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
