User:Herostratus/The Hundred

We looked at 100 random articles to see how many matched WP:GNG -- "the GNG", and here's what we found.

Executive summary

34 meet the GNG, 66 don't. 56 meet the GNG or an SNG (Special Notability Guideline, like WP:NSPORTS etc.). Guessing (it's kind of wild guess), it's maybe like this:

• 49 covered by the GNG or (we guess) could be without too much trouble.
• 22 covered by an SNG
• 29 in trouble.

Some of the ones in trouble could meet the GNG with extra effort (finding offline refs that might be only in a local newspaper archive, offline book in an Italian library, stuff like that) and some couldn't.

Of the 29 in trouble, most don't actually suck. Most of them are OK articles on some level.

If we cut out 29% of our articles, that'd be 1.5 million, dropping us from 5.4 million to 3.9 million articles --still more than the two next-biggest Wikipedias combined. Whether that's desirable we don't know; it's a matter of opinion we guess. We would not lose 29% of our readership. We would look a little less like an academic publication and a little more like a popular publication (a lot of our more obscure science stuff doesn't meet the GNG, while celebrities and popular culture stuff is better documented (and many athletes are under SNG).)

You're keeping In the Flesh (Pink Floyd tour) and 1977 in video gaming and Southridge Mall (Iowa) and Hell Is Empty and All the Devils Are Here and Caterina Scorsone and so forth. You're getting rid of Kanichee layered intrusive complex and Literacy in Tokelau and Gogana conwayi and List of people on the postage stamps of Nigeria and Grant of arms and so forth.

How desirable this is a matter of opinion and depends on your vision of what we are trying to accomplish here. It is what the GNG does for you, though. If it was policy.

Background

The lede sentence of the GNG states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list". (Although the GNG doesn't say so, many (but not all) Wikipedians assume a second sentence: "And if not, probably not".)

The GNG then gives details on what is meant by "reliable sources" and "independent of the subject" and also valorizes secondary sources, and what is meant by "Presumed" (an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject should have an article).

Note that the GNG says reliable and not notable. Contrast a subject covered with articles in reliably fact-checked local paper with a circulation of a few hundred souls, versus coverage in venues such as the Daily Mail (circulation 1.5 million)... the latter is far more famous, but only the former is "notable" in our sense. "Notable" as the GNG uses it does not mean "famous", "important", or even "notable" in the dictionary sense. It means "covered in peer-reviewed, fact-checked, or otherwise reliable sources".

However, our personal opinion that there is some intended relationship between our use of "notable" and the dictionary word "notable" (notable, adj.: Worthy of notice; remarkable; memorable; noted or distinguished; prominent). Otherwise a different word would have been chosen, we figure. How close the the relationship (if, indeed, any) is intended to be is a matter of opinion.

Anyway, as practical matter, many or even most Wikipedians will disparage local papers per the essay WP:LOCAL, and some other low-readership special-interest publications also. The question of whether there's a difference between these (assuming they're all shown to be reliable):

• a local town news website with an estimated ~800 regular viewers (almost all concentrated in one small town)
• a Moody Blues-themed website with an estimated ~800 regular viewers, spread throughout the Anglosphere
• a Franco-Prussian War-themed website with an estimated ~800 regular viewers, spread throughout the world
• a narrowly focused scientific journal (Indian Fern Review, say) with an estimated ~800 readers

is a matter of opinion and the details of the case, we guess. Whether these are equal to the New York Times or Nature... also a matter of opinion, but many editors would probably say "not necessarily". Bottom line is that there's probably, de facto, different weighing for different sources rather than a simple YES/NO status for potential sources. Different weighing means different opinion and different judgement.

The GNG also tries to address the key matter of what is meant by "significant coverage" (or "in-depth coverage", same thing), but fails. It says

• an entire book about the subject is "significant coverage", and
• a passing mention in part of a single sentence is not "significant coverage",

with no discussion of the how to handle material in the huge gap between these two examples (which probably includes >99% of cases).

Left thus at sea, for our part we personally use the two-paragraph rule -- two short paragraphs, or one long one, generally are enough to provide enough information to write at least a very short article, and this eligible to be considered "significant coverage". It depends on the subject and what's in the material of course. The GNG says "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources, not "a reliable source", so we assume that, generally, two sources are wanted, which seems reasonable. ([[WP:BIO, the SNG (Special Notability Guideline) for all people, makes this manifest: "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources" is required. That is only for people, though.)

The GNG is contained within WP:N, which has a great deal more to say about details and special circumstances and considerations. Generally, people just use the GNG except in special cases. There are also many SNGs (Special Notability Guidelines) listed at the top of WP:N. The relationship of SNGs to the GNG -- whether they override the GNG, are co-equal, or are subsidiary -- is matter of some contention.

So to summarize, to meet the GNG's requirements, in our personal opinion:

• You want at least two sources, usually.
• That cover the subject with something on the order of at least a couple short paragraphs, or equivalent.
• In a publication that is reliable, but with a weighting difference between a publication that has 80 full-time fact checkers on staff (Der Spiegel) and one that has a lot fewer, and a weighting difference between a publication with a daily circulation of 150,000 and one with a quarterly circulation of 500, since we assume our "notable" has some relationship to the common adjective "notable".

But there are several ways to skin a cat, and being slightly inclusionist, we sometimes make arguments along the following lines. Sometimes they help and sometimes we don't. This is just our own idiosyncratic personal standard and in no way official.

• If there is one source that greatly exceeds the requirements -- say, a long article in a very reliable and widely read magazine -- we can count that as going a long way to helping establish notability, and look for little supporting coverages to help seal the deal, if there are enough of them, even if individually they are not that great.
• Although mere mentions don't count much, they're not nothing, if there are a lot of them, that might count for something, especially if they are in highly notable publications, and they are full sentences addressing the entity rather than mere listings or passing name-checking.
• Although you want somewhat notable publications, there's no bright line, and if there are several instances of truly in-depth coverage in special-interest publications -- death-metal magazines, Brazilian botany journals, model railroader magazines, etc. -- that might count for something.

Results and commentary

Results

• 25 "Yes" or "Yes, probably" or "Yes,possibly" (meeting the GNG)
• 11 "No, probably"
• 64 "No"

We'll count the "No, probably" as "Yes", to be liberal. That makes 36% Yes.

In: 5 athletes, 2 musicians, a singing duo, 2 actors, a businessman, a judge, "1977 in video gaming", a machine, a drug, a medical device, 3 films, 2 albums, a band tour, a detail of a music contest, an historical event, 2 populated places (one defunct), an ancient site, a school, a shopping mall, a butterfly, a fungus, a plant, a fluid dynamics phenomenon, a cosmic gas cloud, an electromagnetic wavelength, and a cheese.

Out: 6 athletes, a soldier, 2 actors, an entertainer, a priest, a bishop, a politician, an artist, a chess player, an historian, a civil servant, a list of people, 2 schools, 3 buildings, a rail station, a train, 17 populated places, a list of prisons, an organization, a beauty pageant, 5 sporting events, 2 rock formations, a mountain, a fungus, 2 moths, a butterfly, an extinct genus, a census survey, an election, a business term, a game mod, a concept in heraldry, and some comic books.

A lot of those are covered by SNG (Special Notability Guidelines). The relationship between SNG and the GNG -- whether SNG supercede the GNG, are subsidiary to it, or supplemental, or in some other relationship -- is a fraught question and the answer depends on who you talk to. WP:ATHLETE, a significant GNG, lays down a marker in in its first sentence, contradicts it in the second, and contradicts both those in the third. It then goes on to muddy the waters with more temporizing and hedging before it peters out. Other SNGs say different things. Some claim to supersede the GNG and some don't.

As a fact on the ground, sometimes SNGs are taken to supercede the GNG and sometimes not. (See the 2017 Magdalena Zamolska case -- subject meets SNG WP:NCYCLING but not WP:GNG, was deleted anyway on the grounds that WP:GNG supersedes WP:ATHLETE, upheld at Deletion Review -- indicates that it's a debatable situation, at least at the margins.)

Anyway, continuing... of the group not meeting the GNG, SNG cover 14 of the 17 populated places, the politician, potentially 3 of the 6 athletes (the footballer, the gymnast, and the wrestler (there's no wresting SNG but he was in the Olympics) but not the squash player, the race car driver, or the wheelchair racer), the mountain (mountains have a very liberal SNG), one of the give sports events (it was an Olympic event) and the 2 of the 3 buildings. There's a criteria for organizations, but its as stringent as the GNG if not more so. There's an SNG for web content but we don't think our game mod meets it. There no SNG for soldiers but there is a guide made up by the military history wikiproject, WP:SOLDIER, but our soldier doesn't meet it anyway.

So that leaves:

• 34 covered by the GNG
• 22 covered by SNG (14 of these are populated places)
• 44 out in the cold

Of the 45 out in the cold, many could probably be ref'd. Less than half probably. Some could be ref'd with difficulty, such as by sources only existing in paper form and hard to get to. Maybe Saidali Iuldachev if you went to Uzbekistan and dug up hard copies of local papers and could read Uzbek, that sort of thing. Let's say 1/3 could be ref'd with a reasonable level of effort. We don't know if it's that high, but let's say.

• 34 covered by the GNG
• 22 covered by SNG
• 15 probably could be ref'd with a reasonable effort
• 29 on the ice

Commentary

29 on the ice plus 21 covered only by SNG. That's 50% that don't and maybe can't easily meet the GNG, we have 5.4 million articles so that extrapolates to 2.7 million. On the ice and not covered by an SNG, 1.6 million. So even if we took all SNG as gospel we could reduce from 5.4 million to 3.8 million. That's still as many as the German and French wikipedias combined, and those are considered successful projects. If we go strictly by GNG we could go down to 2.7. That's still more than any other language wikipedia -- much more. It may be that these other language project have the right idea and we've metastasized out of control. Those other wikipedias also probably have less vandalism, need fewer admins, fewer new page patrollers, and so forth.

Of course, even with SNG you're getting rid of St Francis Xavier's Cathedral, Wollongong. It's far more important than the two buildings we're keeping (one is just a private house), but those two are on the American National Register of Historic Places list (which is large) and the Cathedral isn't on a similar Australian list (as far as we can tell).

This shows one of the problems with the SNG -- they are a bit arbitrary. Another problem is that, like a lot of rules here, they're sometimes cobbled together in a somewhat random fashion -- somebody adds a sentence, there's some desultory objections but nobody rolls it back, or there's a flurry of edits or a little edit war and it ends up with a change that nobody really notices or understands, or there's a sparsely attended discussion and the SNG is pushed through, or whatever. Another problem is that its kind of random what has a SNG -- Astronomical objects do, animals don't. Professors have an SNG, businessmen and civil engineers don't. Porn actors have an SNG, religious figures don't. Numbers have an SNG, and so do books, but historical events and chemical compounds don't.

Another problem is de facto SNG. Animals don't have an SNG, but as a fact on the ground animal species articles aren't deleted -- they have a de facto SNG. This applies to plant and fungus species also, we think. Solders don't have an SNG, but they have WP:SOLDIER which is written like and referenced in discussions like an SNG, even though it's never been adopted into WP:N. Secondary schools don't have an SNG, but they have WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES which is treated kind of like an SNG.

Because of this, the various SNG's can't really all be treated the same and should be neither taken as gospel nor ignored. It's reasonable to say some SNG make a lot of sense and some are nonsense. It's reasonable to say WP:BASEBALL/N should be treated with more deference than WP:NCURLING. It's reasonable to say that WP:PORNBIO is not more important the de facto traditions defending train stations, funguses and high schools, notwithstanding that one is written down and the others aren't. It's reasonable to say that a given criteria of a given SNG is silly and you're don't think people should pay attention to it.

It's also reasonable to not say these things. It's reasonable to hold that all part of all SNG are equally valid and that de facto traditions mean nothing, if that's how you roll. It's reasonable to maintain that SNG mean little and only the GNG counts, and it's reasonable to maintain that SNG supersede the GNG, and it's also reasonable to aver that the GNG itself is just a guideline and place to start.

In our opinion the only guideline that matters is "Is this good for the wikipedia, does it make sense for use, does it fit with our mission". Everything else is noise.

As to trimming the project by 20% or 50% or whatever (which would take years, but the years are going to pass anyway)... we're skeptical that that's a good idea, but we're not sure it isn't either. It depends on one's answer to the question "What are we trying to accomplish here?" and that's a matter of opinion.

How many suck?

How many of these 100 articles actually suck and should not exist? Somewhere between 1 to 6 in our view. Your results may differ.

Definitely sucks

There weren't really any articles that were horrible -- speedy-deleteable, or just promotional, or egregious BLP violations, or full of probable falsehoods, or anything like that. That's cheering.

Probably sucks

• Alan Taylor (racing driver) is basically a BLP with no refs that devolve, so it's not allowable on those grounds. Should go on that ground. Nice looking article with nice table and infobox and some paragraphs, but Taylor never won a race and is very obscure, and there's a mention of his restaurant so its maybe a little promotional. It's not much of an asset to the encyclopedia.

Possibly sucks

• Loren Stuckenbruck is probably "on the ice". He's a professor at a proper big university and he's written a bunch of books and stuff (on extremely obscure, but very intellectual, topics). It's not like he's a hobo. It's not an unref'd BLP because there's his faculty bio (and that's all there is). Article is not hurting anyone, but if he's in then most any publish-or-perish professor is in (which might be OK). It's not a huge asset to the encyclopedia.
• Kanichee layered intrusive complex is probably "on the ice". It is "is a layered intrusion in Northeastern Ontario, Canada, located in the central portion of Strathy Township about 6.5 km (4.0 mi) northwest of the town of Temagami", which it is hard imagine anything more obscure. It's two sentences and probably always will be (there is one ref). On the other hand it is "scientific", if that matters. Geocruft, maybe, but some people like science stuff. It's not a huge an asset to the encyclopedia.
• Literacy in Tokelau might suck. It's "on the ice" because it's only ref is one primary source, and there might well be no other refs easy to get. It's an interesting and useful article for all that -- if you're interested in the subject. On the other hand 1,500 people live in Tokelau, so who cares actually. More people live in Otis, Massachusetts and we don't care how many of them can read. But Tokelau is a country and Tokelauan is a language, so maybe it's different. Possible mergebait. Article averages one reader per day, and we suppose you could say that that that's too small a readership to bother servicing. It's not a huge an asset to the encyclopedia.
• SLATES. Made up term, and while there are people who use the term, according to Google, it's not a lot of people. Article is poor and poorly ref'd and quite possibly "on the ice", although maybe not. Arguably businesscruft. Gets nine views a day, probably mostly people wearing suits. Whether we want to cater to the wearing-a-suit demographic or if we'd rather leave those types in the dark is a matter of opinion.
• Miss Orlando. It's probably "on the ice". It's essentially a list of winners with some other info. OK article, interesting enough if you're into this stuff -- if the info is true, which we don't know due to lack of refs. Probably sucks since we don't know if it's true.

We don't think it sucks, but we might be in the minority

• Mitrulinia. We don't think it sucks, but we like science stuff. On the hand it is two sentences, clearly does not meet the GNG, has no SNG protection that we know of, and averages one reader a day (probably mostly Poindexter types to be brutally frank, if that matters), and if we're looking to make the project more manageable pages like this are possibly a good place to start. If many people wanted articles like there would at least be an SNG. If there is one we haven't found it.
• Venusia sikkimensis. See Mitrulinia. Arguably biocruft.
• Virachola isocrates. See Mitrulinia. Arguably biocruft.
• Gogana conwayi. See Mitrulinia. Arguably biocruft.
• Coriolano Vighi. We have no idea. 19th century Italian painter. Do we want to document extremely obscure 19th century painters, or not. Does not have an article on the Italian Wikipedia. Probably "on the ice". Article doesn't say much useful about Vighi but did not offend me either. Might suck. We're partial to art history so we're OK with it.

Probably don't suck

We assumed all the articles that meet or might meet the GNG, or are SNG-protected articles like populated-place articles, don't suck. This means that In the Flesh (Pink Floyd tour) and 1977 in video gaming and Southridge Mall (Iowa) and Hell Is Empty and All the Devils Are Here and Caterina Scorsone and so forth automatically don't suck.

There were two articles that were unref'd but we still don't think they suck:

• Lynfield, New Zealand has no references whatsoever but it doesn't suck, it's a well-done article, town has 9,000 people so it's no hamlet, and it's all almost certainly true. List of people on the postage stamps of Nigeria has no references whatsoever but it doesn't suck, it's a nice looking list and is most likely all true. At any rate, it's not covered by the SNG because the article doesn't prove it exists, but assuming it does exist that bare fact ought to be demonstrable.
• List of people on the postage stamps of Nigeria is a harder case. "Nigeria", "postage stamp", and "human being" are all important concepts; whether the intersection of those three is worth knowing about is debatable, but it's part of Nigerian history so maybe. Ref'ing this article might be difficult, but we doubt that the writer just made up the material so there are probably refs somewhere. Scott's stamp catalog or whatever.

Ryo Fukawa -- the article as it stands pretty much sucks. It's a tiny article and there are no refs except his website, and it makes him sound obscure ("On television he generally takes minor roles"). However, we feel its worth making an exception in his case because his Japanese article is is extensive (and includes a section titled "Hairstyle" (!)) and has 20 refs, although it is tagged for poor sourcing. And he has many albums on major labels. So while the article does suck, we wouldn't say it should be deleted -- it just needed to be tagged with {{Expand Japanese}} (unless the case is made that he's only notable in Japan (apparently true) and doesn't rate an article in the Anglosphere wikipedia (but the GNG doesn't say anything like this, and all WP:N has to say is "Sources do not have to be... written in English").)

''Caricature'' (comics) has no references whatsoever but while "out in the cold" it is not "on the ice" -- we checked, and it is probably ref'able: here is review at the bluelinked The A.V. Club so you're halfway to the GNG right there. (We don't know if the A.V. Club is reliable, but a review is an opinion, and all entities are reliable sources for their own contents.) Article itself is not crap, short but OK article, assuming it is true. The author has an article and even his own navbox (he wrote Ghost World), so that helps with importance if not notability.

Anders Beggerud is probably "on the ice", but he was director of the Norwegian Press Directorate in Quisling Norway (and got in trouble for that later), so it's not like he's the guy at the Pump-n-Pay down the corner. Article is five sentences. Pretty obscure, but a bit of stretch in our view to say it sucks. Article is not hurting anyone. Arguably Norwaycruft.

Ballyroney railway station. Defunct rail station is "on the ice" probably. Beyond "Ballyroney was one of the principal loading points for cattle bound for the ports of NW England" (unref'd) it's railcruft. Nice picture and layout though, lots of railcruft details. We enjoyed looking at it the picture and reading the article, so We'd be hard-pressed to say it sucks. People like railroads. Although it doesn't really bear on the question of whether the article sucks or not, but even though there's no SNG for train stations, clearing out all these station articles would be a herculean task and the howls would be heard in Hades, so there's little practical point it considering it. I guess you could figure there's a de facto SNG for stations, if you want.

1976 Austrian Grand Prix. Motor race. Nice-looking article, doesn't offend us. Needs refs.

All the other we think are OK or meet the GNG or an SNG.

The 100

Note on terminology: "404s" means the linked website does not load at all. "Doesn't devolve" means the website loads but doesn't devolve to the intended article -- such as when a link a newspaper article just shows today's front page, for instance (this typically happens if the link has been moved or deleted within the website). In the first case the link is possibly available through an internet archive, in the latter by searching within the website, but we didn't go to this level of effort.

Article	Subject	Meets GNG?	Refs	Notes
Ryszard Piotrowski	Soldier	No	3	2 refs offline, but not seem likely to provide in-depth coverage
John Wetton	Musician	Yes	14	Obits in NME and International Business Times probably sufficient, and there's more. Was in many famous bands.
St Francis Xavier's Cathedral, Wollongong	Building	No	4	1 OK (1 long paragraph in the local Illawarra Mercury), others are self-references.
Luke McKay	Actor	No	3 + 2 external links	1 ref is IMDb, other 2 are passing mentions. External links are to subject's website. Refs are not inline. There's a fair amount of material, but not ref'd
George Lynn (actor)	Actor	No	2	1 mere mention, other offline but probably mere mention
Southridge Mall (Iowa)	Shopping mall	Yes	19	Several articles such as "Southridge plans facelift, new tenants" in Des Moines Register'
Jili, Liuyang	Section of a city	No	2	The refs are Chinese, so it's hard to state unequivocally that they are not notable sources providing in-depth coverage, but it appears not. One appears to be an an official document so it might not qualify for establishing notability, leaving just 1 (possible) source.
Thepperamanallur	Village	No	1	The one ref is a map which 404s
Kanichee layered intrusive complex	Rock formation	No	1	The one ref is in-depth coverage in a national (although special-interest and redlinked) magazine, Canadian Minerologist. But there is only the one ref.
David Jarolím	Footballer	No	3 + 3 external links	1 in-depth (in Czech). The others are statistics listings at best.
Dhamana (Hisar)	Village	No	3	1 ref 404s ands 1 doesn't devolve (and these are links to trivial information anyway), the other is mere listing of a few statistics
Mitrulinia	Fungus	No	1 + 1 external link	Ref is a mere name in a list, external link little more, both in extremely obscure venues (magazine Myconet is bluelinked, but with a two-sentence article, and is defunct (existed 1997 to 2007); the other is a website (Index Fungorum) apparently run by the British government. Article is two sentences.
In the Flesh (Pink Floyd tour)	Band tour	No, probably	5	All refs are offline, so it's difficult to say if WP:GNG is met. 3 of the refs are "Schaffner, p. 216-217", "Schaffner, p. 218", and "Schaffner, p. 219". Who or what Schaffner is is not further elucidated. One ref is to interviews available on VHS tape. The other doesn't devolve. Schaffner may constitute in-depth coverage in a notable book (we don't know), but that that is just one. VHS tape format does not indicate likely high notability of that source.
Amauroascus	Fungus	No, probably	2 + 1 external link	Similar to Mitrulinia above: name in a list in Myconet, list of a few bare facts in website Index Fungorum, to which add ref to a 1893 book in German which is on a single page and may be a bare description (impossible to tell). Article is two sentences.
Venusia sikkimensis	Moth	No	2	1 ref is a mere name in a list on an obscure website, the other a book which depth of coverage is impossible to tell. Article is two sentences.
Eleazar (High Priest)	Priest	No	3	2 refs are mere mentions. The third does give a couple sentences of coverage, but that is just one ref.
Hell Is Empty and All the Devils Are Here	Album	Yes	2	Two in-depth reviews, one at a notable website (AllMusic), although the other is at a probably-obscure and now-defunct specialist genre website.
Literacy in Tokelau	Census survey	No	1	Single primary-source ref
Anders Beggerud	Civil servant	No	1	The one ref 404s, but it is probably in-depth, in Norsk krigsleksikon 1940–1945 which is bluelinked (with a four-sentence article) but is still an obscure specialist work in Norwegian. But anyway, only the single ref.
Alan Taylor (racing driver)	Race car driver	No	0 + 2 external links	Article is unsourced, of the two external links is to the subject's own website and it 404s, the other is labeled as a bio (at a specialist racing website) but doesn't devolve and he doesn't turn up if you search the site.
Castleknock Community College	Secondary school	No	0 + 1 external link	External link is to article subject's own website
David Chisnall	Rugby footballer	Yes	6 + 6 external links (several duplicates)	"Dave Chisnall: Powerful, pacey Warrington prop" in notable paper The Independent. Full obit, albeit in a local St. Helens Star, plus another in-depth article, though also in local paper Warrington Guardian. The other refs either either 404 or are mere statistics listings.
Niemierzyno, Szczecinek County	Village	No	1	The one ref is to a government website, is probably not in-depth, and doesn't devolve
Stygionympha irrorata	Butterfly	Yes, possibly	2	1 ref is to a mere listing with taxonomic and other statistics, although range is shown, which could be considered to constitute in-depth coverage, for a butterfly. The other ref is to Field Guide to Butterflies of South Africa, offline and no page given, so can't tell if it has in-depth coverage or not. Probably does.
Ballyroney railway station	Rail station (defunct)	No	1	One ref is a mere listing with a couple statistics
SLATES	Business term	No	1 + 1 external link	The one ref is in-depth in a notable (if specialized) bluelinked publication, MIT Sloan Management Review -- but the author appears to coin the neologism SLATES in that article, so can't be used to establish notability. The external link is a blog, and although the author may be notable, he redlinks. It's averred at the link that he uses the term extensively, but the link doesn't devolve.
Charleville, County Cork	Town	Yes	18 +1 external link	None of the 18 refs seem very good, and most of them are about the town's various names, which is covered extensively. The "History", "Geography", and "Economy" sections -- the heart of an article about a populated place, we would think -- have zero refs, although there is significant material there. Besides the "Names" section, only the "Transport" section, has refs. Nor is there much in-depth coverage. But there is an article "The Old Name of Charleville, Co. Cork" in the bluelinked Éigse. The article is really only about the town's name, but on that basis it probably meets the GNG.
Caterina Scorsone	Actress	Yes	16 + 2 external links	There're full articles/interviews in TV Guide and the Toronto Sun.
Loren Stuckenbruck	Historian	No	0 + 4 external links	The links: 1) brief bio, but by his employer 2) 404s 3) brief bio, but at "4 Enoch: The Online Encyclopedia of Second Temple Judaism, and Christian and Islamic Origins" in a wiki-looking format (although not editable, unless with an account) and anyway looks highly special-interest, 4) does not devolve.
List of Arizona state prisons	List of prisons	No	4 +1 external link	1 article about Arizona prisons (and other topics, but the Arizona system is described) in the widely-read New York Times. There's one to allgov.com, but only a passing mention, and we don't know if allgov.com is reliable. The other two, and the external link, are to the Arizona prison system website. The article mainly just lists the prisons, of which are named "Arizona State Prison Complex – Location", so it could be refactored and renamed to Arizona State Prison Complex (disambiguation) and exist on that basis.
Miss Orlando	Beauty pageant	No	6 + 1 external link	4 of the 6 refs are to "PRLog -- Press Release Distribution". One of the others 404s, and the remaining one is to the University of Central Florida Student Life website; it arguable whether this it is in-depth (really just a couple-three scattered sentences) and anyway its an obscure special-interest publication. The external link is the pageant's website.
Tectaria zeilanica	Plant	No, probably	3	All three refs are offline, and none are inline (they just ref the entire article, which is four sentences). One of them is an article, "Rediscovery of Tectaria zeylanica (Houtt.) Sledge family: Dryopteridaecae: a rare species of Western Ghats, South India", covering three pages, so that is probably in-depth coverage. But it is in Indian Fern Journal, which redlinks and looks to be a highly obscure special-interest publication. The other two may or may not offer in-depth coverage, hard to tell.
Michael Omartian	Musician	Yes	10 + 5 external links	Biography at AllMusic. Biographies at CCM (Contemporary Christian Musics) and at Yamaha.com, less reliable/notable but fairly extensive. The rest is a passing mention or a name in a list. Squeaks by in our view.
2003 Slovak Cup Final	Sports match	No	2	One is a football website, which narrows the interest, and it is in Slovak, which further narrows it (more people live in Wisconsin than Slovakia), and coverage of just the finals is not all that extensive. The other is also a Slovak football website, and 404s.
Cnoidal wave	Fluid dynamics phenomenon	Yes	35 + 4 general + 8 Further reading links	We're going to assume its good. It's a lengthy and detailed article with many complicated equations and 39 refs. Most of the refs are offline and the rest we probably can't understand, but assuming they support the material, there is certainly enough to support a large article. Being academic refs, they are probably quite reliable. All special-interest, but there are a lot of them, and it adds up in our view.
Germany in the Eurovision Song Contest 2008	Detail of a music contest	No, probably	4	One of the refs 404s. One is to Wikipedia (!). One is to the Eurovision contest website. That leaves one, which seems to be in-depth coverage in what looks to be more or less general-interest publication, although it is in German so hard to be sure. Still, that's only one.
Mahón cheese	Cheese	Yes, probably	3	Hard to tell. One ref 404s but with the title "The Taste of Menorca: Mahon" is it surely in-depth coverage -- in what I think is a book, Cheese From Spain (could be a magazine), which is pretty special-interest. There's a full paragraph (or more) in the book Cheese: Chemistry, Physics and Microbiology (Major Cheese Groups), which again: highly special-interest. Third ref is off-line, but is probably somewhat in-depth, in the somewhat more general-interest Cheese Primer. Refs are awfully specialized, but we all things considered we put it down as squeaking by.
Coriolano Vighi	Artist	No	1	One ref is in Italian and not Google-translatable. It covers two pages of a a book, so possibly in-depth. But was published in 1889. Article is five sentences.
Lyman-alpha blob 1	Cosmic gas cloud	Yes	6	"Central powering of the largest Lyman-[alpha] nebula is revealed by polarized radiation" is offline, but is probably substantial coverage; "Unlocking the Secrets of the Giant Blobs" might. They are both in the notable publication Nature -- circulation is 53,000, and 3 million unique readers online per month is claimed. There's something in The Astrophysical Journal, which bluelinks, although pretty special-interest. We can't tell if it is substantial coverage or not. "Giant Space Blob Glows from Within" and "ALMA Uncovers Secrets of Giant Space Blob" provide extensive coverage, but its a press release published by the European Southern Observatory itself, so not usable for establishing notability. The other is just some statistics. The Nature articles are probably enough.
Pisgah, Virginia	Village	No	1	The one ref is just some statistics.
Muri Express	Train	No	7 + 2 external links	None of the refs are inline (that is, they all reference the entire article.) Timetable. Timetable. YouTube video the train with no narration. Ditto. Photo of the train on Flickr. External links are both official sites. That leaves two refs. They provide substantial coverage (one marginally so), but both are anonymous posts in special-interest blogs and are not reliable.
Cross Roads, Ripley County, Indiana	Village	No	4	Two refs don't devolve (and are most probably not substantial). One provides some bare statistics. The remainder is offline (a book, From Needmore to Prosperity: Hoosier Place Names in Folklore and History) but probably provides a single sentence of coverage.
Canoeing at the 1992 Summer Olympics	Sports event	No	2 (neither inline).	Both refs are to official International Olympic Committee sources. Beyond bare statistics, the article has three sentences.
Michael Oulton	Bishop	No	3	Two refs are to official sites of his church and his diocese, the other is to a Who's Who entry.
William D. Hassett, Jr.	Businessman	Yes	10	Obit in the The Buffalo News, coverage in the New York Times and Boston Globe.
Ryo Fukawa	Entertainer	No	0 + 1 external link	External link is to subject's page.
Adilson dos Santos	Footballer	Yes, probably	3 + 2 external links.	External links don't load or are just statistics. The actual refs are all in Korean. They seem to provide substantial coverage, but all three seem to be specialist football publications. On the other hand, football is not butterfly collecting; it is pretty widely followed (although a bit less in Asia than elsewhere). South Korea is a big country. So all in all subject might meet the GNG.
East Broad Street–Davie Avenue Historic District	District of a town	No	2	Both refs are primary, government sources.
Jake Lappin	Wheelchair racer	No	16	There ares 16 refs, but: not independent of subject, not independent of subject, name in a list, 404, 404, doesn't devolve, doesn't devolve, passing mention, doesn't devolve, passing mention, name in a list, passing mention, passing mention, passing mention, registration required, mere list of statistics (also not independent of subject). External links are not independent of subject, not independent of subject, repeat of a link. It is a reasonably good article and looks well-ref'd, but nothing checks out. Some of the passing mentions are more than just a name listing, e.g. "Teenage rising star... Jake Lappin [is] among an exciting new breed...". If you put these together you've maybe got a start, at least. If the 404s and not-devolvers were rescued, you might have something. We are looking at articles as they are, though, not as they might be.
Big Bone Methodist Church	Building	No	1	The one ref doesn't devolve and is probably not substantial anyway.
Otto Bron	Wrestler	No	1	The one ref gives bare statistics.
Mayak Nikodimsky	Village	No	6	There are six refs, but all in Russian, and mostly offline, or 404s, or doesn't devolve. It seems likely that all offer just bare statistics, and since the article is two sentences and the place has a population of three souls, it is unlikely that there is significant coverage of the history or whatever of this village.
Auckland School Shimla	School	No, probably	1 + 1 external link	The one reference is substantial coverage independent of the subject, in the Hill Post (which redlinks, but looks to be a large regional newspaper). But that is still just one link. The external link is to the school's website, and it 404s. (It's not clear if this is a secondary school or not.)
Lynfield, New Zealand	Town	No	0	No references.
House at 10th and Avery Streets	Building	No	2	One ref has marginally extensive coverage (there might be more, but is is a photocopy and mostly illegible), but it is a primary document -- a government form. The other doesn't devolve and is probably not substantial anyway.
The Howling Tower	Short story / game mod	No	2	One ref is special interest commercial site and isn't substantial anyway. The other is an obscure special-interest forum post, offering a couple photocopies though, but marginally substantial coverage if that.
Davichi	Singing duo	Yes	26	It's hard to say. The references are mostly in Korean. However, KBS World Radio, independent of the subject and maybe somewhat notable (although reliability is unknown) has a biography. The article is extensive and detailed, and based on the way the references are used, and assuming they support the material, they quite likely constitute sufficient substantial coverage to meet the GNG.
Shawsheen Village Historic District	District in a town	No	3	One ref doesn't devolve and probably is not substantial. The second is to a government site and is not substantial. The third is to a historic marker. Unlike even the most obscure book or journal, this is probably not even theoretically checkable without going to the place (at least until a photo becomes available), so its use as a ref is sketchy, and anyway a plaque is probably a primary source, plus plaques are probably not reliable (see Lies Across America).
El Desmonte	Village	No	1	The one ref doesn't devolve. The article is one sentence, so that ref probably doesn't provide substantial coverage.
Pachytegos	Genus (extinct)	No	1	The one ref doesn't even mention the genus, and anyways is a mere list in an obscure special-interest Finnish website run (apparently) by a single person. That site does list its ref, which a book -- but only one page is cited for the entire list, so it itself is probably only a list.
Escot	Village	No	1	The one ref doesn't devolve. The article is one sentence, so that ref probably doesn't provide substantial coverage. However, the French article is extensive (although mostly statistics) and has ten references. Only 131 people live there, so it may not not be notable in real life. The French article has a "History" section with one sentence, "In 1385, Escot had eight fires and depended on the bailiwick of Aspe" (not ref'd), which seems to be reaching. If the only interesting thing was some fires in the 14th century, it might be questioned if there's anything worthwhile to say about the subject. Anyway, we didn't evaluate the French article and sources, we are looking at the English Wikipedia.
Halton Borough Council election, 2015	Election	No	1	The one ref is not independent, is obscure, does not contain any information on the subject, and the title speaks of a 2015 event as "upcoming".
Moniuszeczki	Village	No	1	The one ref is an official site, doesn't devolve, and probably doesn't provide substantial coverage (the article is one sentence).
Grant of arms	Concept in heraldry	No	1 (not inline)	Ref is offline, but is one page in a special-interest book (The High Court of Chivalry), so may not be substantial (although the article it refs is somewhat substantial -- six long sentences). Anyway it is just the one source.
Sea Dogs of Australia	Film	Yes	5 + 2 external links	Short review in an Adelaide paper, advertisement (but giving details), brief description in Sydney paper. The others (including the external links) are offline and probably not substantial, or not substantial, or not reliable (IMDb). But the Adelaide and Sydney paper sources are sufficient.
1977 in video gaming	1977 in video gaming	Yes, probably	11	There aren't any sources which substantially cover the article subject, e.g. "1977 was an important year in video gaming and now I'm going to describe it...". Should probably be renamed to "List of events in 1977 video gaming" since that's what it is, in which case we don't have to ref the subject but just the entries, so let's do that. There are 11 refs... 1) TriSavvy, bare fact. 2) One-person special-interest website (not reliable), one sentence. 3) Company website (not indepdendent), bare fact. 4) Substantial coverage of an entry, at a website published under the aegies of Pearson Education. 5) A bit more than a bare fact, at special-interest fansite (atariage.com), reliability questionable. 6) [Won't load] at special-interest fansite (classicgaming.com), reliability questionable. 7) Marginally substantial coverage of an entry at special-interest Nintendo fansite (nindb.net), reliability unknown. 8) Doesn't-devolve at a person's personal Bally fansite, reliability suspect. 9_ Substantial coverage of an entry, one-person fansite, special-interest in the sense of old-school video gaming in general, as opposed to just Nintento or whatever, so less special-interest than some. One-person site, but extensive article with photos, looks accurate. 10) Substantial coverage of an entry, but at the company's website (not independent). 11) Marginally substantial coverage, but at a one-person website (not reliable). There is one somewhat OK ref (the Pearson Education one), but it is obscure and really only a blog-type thing that is probably not really independently fact checked. Still, many people would say Pearson Education = reliable. And if you add all the others together it maybe amounts to the equivalent of another good ref, so article maybe squeaks by. It's debatable.
Mick Dittman	Jockey	No, probably	2 + 1 external link	One ref is not accessible (requires subscription) but looks substantial, but at special-interest horse-racing site. Horse racing is fairly popular, but it's not football. Other ref is to a book, offline, not clear that it offers substantial coverage. It might (it references the sentence "Nicknamed 'The Enforcer' due to his strong use of the whip, he was renowned for his vigour and strength in a tight finish"; whether there's more we don't know). External link is somewhat substantial (five sentences, though mostly just race results), but at a special-interest racing site just for the state of Victoria, a page called "Australian Racing Hall of Fame" where the subject is a member, so independence of subject is somewhat debatable. Probably not enough to meet the GNG in our view.
Schonstett	Town	No	1 + 1 external link	The one ref is just a list of towns with population, and doesn't even seem to list this town. The external link claims to be a history of the town, but doesn't devolve, so it's reliability is unknown.
2009 All-Ireland Minor Camogie Championship	Sports event	No	6 + 1 external link	1) Is a book, offline. Ref is to one page and its unclear if this is substantial. It might be. 2) Doesn't devolve and not independent of the subject, 3) substantial, but at the website of "Munster Council, a Provincial Council of the Gaelic Athletic Association" so probably not independent 4) substantial, but at a camogie website, so obscure and special-interest, notability and reliability possibly low (Camogie is of local interest to Ireland (which has fewer people than Indiana)) 5) Repeats earlier refs, 6) 404s and anyway not independent of the subject. 1) Is a book, offline. Ref is to one page and its unclear if this is substantial. Even a short description The Irish Times, even if in the sports pages, would help. But there's no evidence of that. External link is also not independent of the subject.
Saidali Iuldachev	Chess player	No	7	1) Bare listing of results, special-interest website apparently one-man operation. 2) Bare listing of results, World Chess Federation site, primary source. 3) 404, not likely a good source anyway 4) Bare listing, World Chess Federation. 5) Bare mention in a list, special-interest chess website. 6) Bare listing of statistics, special-interest chess website. 7) Bare listing of results, one-man website. External link, bare listing of statistics, special-interest chess website.
EMI TG12345	Machine	Yes, probably	6	Very substantial article, but at a redlinked special-interest website, MusicTech ("The Website for Producers, Engineers and Recording Musicians") but which looks solid. 2) passing mention (same venue), 404, substantial article in a special-interest magazine but this one is bluelinked: Tape Op, but which is "mainly a volunteer effort". Like MusicTech, it is really a professional journal. Next one doesn't devolve and is to MuscTech, but the next one is substantial coverage in a bluelinked magazine, Sound on Sound. Substantial coverage in three different journals, all obscure but are real operations and look somewhat reliable probably, and two are bluelinked... probably enough to meet the GNG.
Tonight the Stars Revolt!	Album	Yes	6	Review in Rolling Stone, AllMusic, etc.
Bến Súc	Village (defunct)	Yes, posssibly	4	Hard to tell -- three refs are offline, the other just points to a book. One is in Vietnamese. The "History" section is four substantial complex sentences, describing the destruction of the village during Operation Cedar Falls which has a substantial article. If the refs support this section -- and they way they are laid out, it looks like they probably do -- this could possibly be enough to meet the GNG, depending on it the refs are substantial. The last one is a book and covers two pages, so it might be. Article should possibly be renamed to Destruction of Bến Súc.
Amani High School	Secondary school	No	0 + 5 external links	First three are not independent of the subject. The fourth 404s and anyway is a UN report, and thus a primary document. The fifth is a long article by the BBC, but Amani High School is just mentioned in passing as the venue for a speech.
American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition	Organization	No	3 + 1 external link	3 of the 4 are not independent of the subject, the other one is offline but is probably not independent of the the subject and has other issues.
Dara (Mesopotamia)	Ancient site	Yes	13 + 12 other sources + 3 external links	Most of the sources are offline. However, their titles and they way they are used indicate substantial coverage. However, most are in somewhat obscure special-interest journals and books, but these are all academic venues and so likely to be pretty reliable. And there are a lot of them, supporting a substantial article. We assessed this as probably meeting the GNG.
Gogana conwayi	Moth	No	2	One ref doesn't devolve and search finds nothing. The other is basically a mere listing, except that range is shown, which might be kind of substantial coverage, for a moth. But it is at a Finnish special-interest website "mainly maintained by Finnish volunteers". Only of local interest to Borneo anyway. Article is two sentences.
W band	Electromagnetic wavelength	No, probably	5 + 1 external link	Four of the five links are not inline (they just ref the whole article). The other one doesn't devolve. The other four are to obscure special-interest journals such as "IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits". They're offline, and whether these offer substantial coverage is unclear. Our guess is they don't. The external link is mere mention.
Katia Pietrosanti	Gymnast	No	1 + 2 external links	Nothing but bare stats.
Crash Goes the Hash	Film	No, probably	4 + 3 external links	Description, but at a 3 Stooges fansite. Description, but at an online store. Very brief primary source video clip. External links are to descriptions at IMDb (not reliable), AllMovie (don't know), and repeat of a a ref. That leaves on offline source, a book, The Complete Three Stooges: The Official Filmography and Three Stooges Companion. It's probably a substantial description, paragraph anyway. Trade books are not usually very reliable as they are not usually independently fact-checked; you're relying on the expertise and diligence of the author, who we don't know who he is (Jon Solomon, who might be this Jon Solomon). He could copy from IMDb for all we know. Even if accepted, that only makes it one good ref, unless AllMovie is good, which we're not sure.
SAM Splint	Medical device	No, probably	4 + 1 external link	The News-Times of Newport, Oregon (circulation 6,000, the paper of record for Lincoln County, Oregon) has an article ""Sam Splint: An epiphany found in a gum wrapper" which 404s but must be substantial coverage. But is a small-town paper. Then there's substantial coverage, but at www.firerescue1.com which is a special-interest website (it sells products, but does not seem primarily commercial). Then substantial coverage, but at a commercial site (although they're not selling this product). The last one is not independent of the subject. The external link is somewhat substantial coverage (but of the "how-to" variety) at an obscure website. Well, plenty of substantial coverage, all at obscure special-interest site or one local paper. Even if you allow the local paper is reliable and worthwhile, that's only one. The others don't look reliable enough.
Dupont, Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana	Village	No	1	The one ref doesn't devolve, and looks to be a local news site of unknown reliability or notability. And that's all there is.
Rod Tucker	Cricket umpire	Yes, possiby	4 + 2 external links	1 doesn't devolve and is probably a passing mention, 1 just lists his name; the two external links, one requires a subscription and the other offers some basic facts such as birthdate and batting averages. Of the other two, one is in a cricket-specific site and is marginally substantial, the other is actually substantial, with seven full sentences including two quotes of the subject. It is at the International Cricket Council website. There's nothing in a general-readership Australian paper or anything, and with really only 1.5 in-depth coverages in special-interest publications... Maybe it meets the GNG. We feel there's probably something in Australian papers somewhere, so we'll count it as Yes.
Kereford Formation	Rock formation	No	1	The one ref doesn't devolve, is not inline, and anyway is proabably just a bare fact since the article is one sentence long.
James Glencairn Cunningham	Politician	No	2	One ref is a deadlink to Ancestry.com. The other ref is offline, but even if it is substantial coverage (doubtful how in-depth it is, since it is just one page in a book and references one sentence) it is still only one ref.
Jamie Hickox	Squash player	No	4	1) Offline, probably a bare fact 2) bare listing of his name, 3) does not mention the subject and actually has nothing to do with the article, 4) somewhat substantial coverage, but in a special-interest (squash) site for one nation (Canada). Even if you consider that, its just the one.
Mandung	Village	No	2 + 1 external links	All three are just maps.
All Tomorrow's Parties (2009 film)	Film	Yes, probably	2 + 2 external links	Full brief review at bluelinked (but free giveaway) LA Weekly. The other purports to be a review of a screening at SXSW, but doesn't devolve. It is to HitFix.com which redirect to Uproxx, where the review can't be found. Uproxx does bluelink though. Neither publication is exactly the Denver Post and are probably of questionable reliability, but since it is two reviews at two bluelinked entities, it might meet the GNG. The two external links don't add anything helpful.
Joe Pesci	Actor	Yes	16 + 2 external links	It's Joe Pesci. Big movie star.
Nam Yimyaem	Judge	No, probably	2	Neither ref (both to The Nation (Thailand)) devolve. Based on how they're used and the material in the article, our guess is that they are just brief mentions, although we can't be sure.
List of people on the postage stamps of Nigeria	List of people	No	0	No refs, and its possible that none are available -- article may be original research.
Biathlon at the 1988 Winter Olympics – Individual	Sporting event	No	2	One ref is not independent of the subject, the other offers substantial coverage, albeit at a special-interest site which is shutting down soon. Anyway that is just one source.
Virachola isocrates	Butterfly	No	1	One ref, offline so can't tell if it is substantial. Article is three sentences so probably not, and anyway it in redlinked special-interest venue, Advances in Horticulture and Forestry, and is just one ref.
Mount Gould (Tasmania)	Mountain	No	2 + 2 external links	1) bare facts at a special-interest site, 2) doesn't devolve, is at a government site and so probably not independent of the subject (entity is owned by the goverment), and search at the site finds bare listings. External links, 1) is at government parks site and so definitely not independent of the subject, 2) may offer substantial coverage (ref is not searchable). It's an academic paper published in Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania, a probably-low-readership special-interest publication. Even if you allow that one, its still only one good ref.
Beta2-adrenergic agonist	Drugs	Yes	8 + 1 external link	There is a New York Times article which seems to offer some substantial coverage (terms are different so it's hard to be sure). There are a number of articles that seem to offer substantial coverage. They are in special-interest publications like Respiratory Medicine and the British Journal of Pharmacology. Expert Opinion on Investigational Drugs, stuff like that. Specialized, but probably quite reliable. And there are several, and added in to the Times piece we figure it passes the GNG.
Shacaya Thomas	Cricketeer	No, probably	6 + 2 external links	All six refs and one of the external links are to Cricket Archive, not accessible as a subscription is required. All six appear to be mere statistics, although it's hard to be sure. The remaining external link is to a page of facts, such as birthdate and batting averages, at a special-interest cricket site.
Panic of 1792	Historical event	Yes, probably	4	Substantial coverage in all four refs. All four are in fairly obscure special-interest publications -- Harvard's Business History Review and the Journal of Economic History which are presumably peer-reviewed, and the "NBER DAE Summer Institute" and the New York Fed, which we don't know how well these are fact-checked. Two of the refs are by Sylla, Wright, and Cowen, and the third is Cowen alone, so its a bit of a walled garden. At one point Cowen et al say "is off the screens of most scholars, including even financial historians" elsewhere "Most scholars know little about the panic of 1792", so you really have to question how notable this subject actually is. Nevertheless, because the subject is covered well in all four refs and at least two are reliable (if obscure) and its a "serious" subject, we gave it a probable Yes for meeting the GNG.
Lumut, Malaysia	Town	No	0 + 1 external link	External link doesn't devolve, and anyway is not independent of the subject (it's a provincial-government website). Town has 32,000 souls so there may possibly be more refs somewhere.
1976 Austrian Grand Prix	Sporting Event	No	4	Two of the refs are to the same offline book and reference a bare statistic. The third is substantial coverage of a driver who wasn't even in the race (on a probably not very reliable site), fourth is bare stats and not independent of the subject.
Caricature (comics)	Comic books	No	0	No refs