Wikipedia:Review tests

This essay is in development.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors.

Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion, especially since this page is still under construction.

Shortcuts

Wikipedia has a set of guidelines which editors use when reviewing articles. New articles are considered against a set of criteria in three tests. The Notability test, the Quality test, and the Verifiability test. These tests involve a reviewer checking the article and its References to assess whether the article passes the criteria for each test. References that are not Reliable sources will be ignored for these purposes.

Notability test edit

Shortcut

WP:NTEST

Articles require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a given topic can have an article or not. It is the method used to assess whether a subject is relevant, notable, or worthy of inclusion. The policy is referred to as WP:N. Specific subjects have their own notability tests, any subject not covered by a specific test is covered by the general guideline, referred to as WP:GNG.

Wikipedia's concept of notability applies this basic standard to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics. Article and list topics must be notable, or "worthy of notice". Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity, the notability test is used to assess these factors.

Specific subjects, such as any populated place, automatically pass the notability test. This will almost never apply to people, only distinguished academics, high ranking politicians, and top tier sports players may pass the notability test in this way.

Verifiability test edit

Shortcut

WP:VTEST

Other people using the encyclopedia need to be able to verify that the information comes from a reliable source.

All information on Wikipedia must be verifiable. This guideline exists to protect Wikipedia from incorrect information. Even if you know something to be true, other people may not. If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, then it should not have a separate article and will not be approved, or may be deleted. It is up to you to include sources when making a new article. The reviewing editor does not have to look for sources when rejecting a new page or draft.

Certain facts do not need to be referenced, some common knowledge concepts do not need a reference. For example you do not have to prove that India exists, or prove that the sky is blue, these things are known to be true. This does not apply to people, Brad Pitt is not assumed to be an actor, and Donald Trump is not assumed to be the president of the United States, even though several million people know these things to be true.

Quality test edit

Shortcut

WP:QTEST

All articles must be written from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic style and be compatible with what Wikipedia is.

To maintain the quality of Wikipedia's content, editors will assess the way an article is written. They will consider the:

Title: Editors may use their discretion to merge or group two or more related topics into a single article. Guidelines outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list.
Promotional material: Content is considered at the reviewers discretion to determine whether it has promotional content or reads like an advertisement. It is possible for the entire article to be promotional, or it may be a few sentences. Articles which are unduly positive towards the subject, or that use words like "leading supplier" or "first of kind" are rejected as containing peacock terms.
Neutral point of view Content is considered at the reviewers discretion to determine whether it is written from a neutral viewpoint.
No original research,
What Wikipedia is not: Wikipedia will not accept certain types of article, even if they meet all other criteria, for example a dictionary definition, an essay or recent news story.
Biographies of living persons: Certain content may be libelous or unproven, if found, it will be deleted.
COPYVIO: If you have copied an image or text from a copyrighted source (including your own), it will be immediately deleted. This is a serious issue; editors who do it more than once may be blocked.

Reliable sources edit

Shortcut

WP:RSTEST

All sources must be reliable, published and independent. They can be either physical books and newspapers, or online websites.

The most common type of source is a news report, any reliable source can be referenced, provided it was published in a persistent form, such as a physical medium or electronic file. Offline sources such as books and gravestones can be used as sources.

Do not use: Facebook, YouTube, iTunes, IMDb, Wikipedia, the subject's own website, a self-published book or any user-generated content such as social media. These sources are not reliable or independent. The exception to this is when using the subjects own website to expand the article after it has passed the notability test. Some YouTube videos made by reliable institutions are acceptable, this is assessed on a case by case basis.

References edit

Shortcut

WP:RTEST

To prove that an article meets the criteria outlined above, editors are required to include references to reliable sources.

See Help:Referencing for beginners

General notability guideline edit

Shortcut

WP:GNGTEST

This is the general notability guideline which most topics are assessed against.

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.

"Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
- The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM.
- Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton,^[1] that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band.
"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, and in any language. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability.
"Sources"^[2] should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected.^[3] Sources do not have to be available online or written in English. Multiple publications from the same author or organization are usually regarded as a single source for the purposes of establishing notability.
"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent.^[4]
"Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject should be included. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is not, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.^[5]

Notes edit

^ Martin Walker (1992-01-06). "Tough love child of Kennedy". The Guardian.
^ Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, and academic journals. 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. It is common for multiple newspapers or journals to publish the same story, sometimes with minor alterations or different headlines, but one story does not constitute multiple works. Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Similarly, a series of publications by the same author or in the same periodical is normally counted as one source.
^ Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of notability. See also: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable sources for handling of such situations.
^ Moreover, not all coverage in reliable sources constitutes evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation; for example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories are all examples of coverage that may not actually support notability when examined, despite their existence as reliable sources.

[1] Martin Walker (1992-01-06). "Tough love child of Kennedy". The Guardian.

[2] Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, and academic journals. 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.

[3] Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic. It is common for multiple newspapers or journals to publish the same story, sometimes with minor alterations or different headlines, but one story does not constitute multiple works. Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Similarly, a series of publications by the same author or in the same periodical is normally counted as one source.

[4] Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of notability. See also: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable sources for handling of such situations.

[5] Moreover, not all coverage in reliable sources constitutes evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation; for example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, and minor news stories are all examples of coverage that may not actually support notability when examined, despite their existence as reliable sources.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]