Wikipedia:Notability (fiction): Difference between revisions

The following is a proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption.

This page in a nutshell: Articles on a work of fiction or fictional element should demonstrate real-world notability from reliable sources. Elements which fail to demonstrate notability individually may be grouped to create an article which can demonstrate overall notability. Elements which, according to reliable sources, are essential to understand a notable fictional topic may also merit articles. Articles should focus on the demonstrated notability for the topic, with an appropriate balance of plot information When appropriate, spinout articles may be used for listing characters or other elements of the work that lack real-world coverage. Articles on fiction that do not demonstrate notability should be improved to standards, merged into a larger article, or moved to a GFDL-compatible wiki.

For articles about books and films, rather than fictional elements therein, refer to Wikipedia:Notability (books) and Wikipedia:Notability (films).

For information about writing articles on fiction, refer to Manual of Style (Writing about fiction).

Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) covers the notability of characters, items, places, and other elements (including individual episodes of serialized works such as television or comic book series) in a work of fiction.

This guideline is based on three excerpts:

From Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#PLOT:

Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should cover their real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's development, impact or historical significance, not solely a detailed summary of that work's plot. This applies both to stand-alone works, and also to series. A brief plot summary may sometimes be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic.

From Wikipedia:Notability:

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

From Wikipedia:Editing policy:

Whatever you do, endeavour to preserve information. Instead of deleting: try to rephrase; correct the inaccuracy while keeping the content; move text within an article or to another article (existing or new); add more of what you think is important to make an article more balanced; or request a citation by adding the {{fact}} tag. Exceptions include: duplication or redundancy; irrelevancy; patent nonsense; copyright violations; or inaccuracy (attempt to correct the misinformation or discuss the problems first before deletion).

For articles on fiction, reliable sources may cover such things as design, development, reception and cultural impact. This is real-world coverage because it describes the real-world aspects of the work. Fictional coverage describes the work's fictional elements, such as the setting, characters, and story.

Based on this reasoning and the above excerpts, fictional concepts can be presumed notable if they have received significant real-world coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. However, notability for individual topics on fiction should be judged on a case-by-case basis while following Wikipedia's core policies of verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view.

Articles on a work of fiction (a book, movie, television series, video game, or other medium) should demonstrate notability by citing critical reception, viewings or sales figures, development and other information from reliable sources. Such sources can include creators' commentary and interviews regarding the work or topic, bearing in mind the restrictions if the work is self-published. Although data such as cast and crew members, publication or airing dates and length of work can be taken from reliable sources, such information does not demonstrate notability.

Notable topics merit individual articles

Fictional elements, as well as episodes or entries for serial works, may be able to assert notability as described above. Examples include Superman, Jason Voorhees, Troy McClure, Pauline Fowler and Hell Is Other Robots. In other cases, notability of fictional topics is better demonstrated for a common group than in individual articles for each topic. When a notable element has its own article, this article should be summarized in the parent article, and {{main}} or {{seealso}} templates should be used to direct users to where they may find more information (for example, an overview of Characters of Carnivàle is provided by the "Cast" section of Carnivàle, while a brief summary of Squall Leonhart is included in Characters of Final Fantasy VIII to compare with other listed characters).

Notable groups of topics merit aggregate articles

In many cases, while individual elements cannot establish notability individually, a grouping of elements may be able to do so. These groupings merit articles, which may be a list article, or some other aggregate article (Characters of Kingdom Hearts, Smallville (season 1)). A grouping of elements has established notability if there is significant coverage of the grouping as a whole, or if there is a significant amount of coverage of the individual elements, excluding trivial coverage. If there is a non-trivial amount of real-world coverage, found across multiple sources, for the majority of elements in a group, then that group is notable.

If an element has its own article, this article should be summarized in the aggregate article, and users should be directed to where they may find more information. Further details on writing and creating these articles can be found at Wikipedia:Lists and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works).

Some topics are necessary to understand others

For longer works or for those in episodic or serial format, it may be necessary to provide additional information on individual characters, the setting, or unique items and concepts. Generally, these fictional elements are described in a section of the parent article or an aggregate article. Sections of an article do not need to demonstrate independent notability.

However, if reliable secondary sources describe a fictional element as necessary or critical for the understanding of a notable topic, and the amount of detail necessary to explain that element would be distracting or otherwise too long within either the parent topic or in an aggregate article, then that topic merits its own article. This "spinout" article should be written from a real-world perspective and focus on the real-world significance of the subtopic. Like all Wikipedia articles, spinout articles are edited in accordance with our policies and guidelines; specifically, content must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources.

Editors should not create a spinout if the parent article or a suitable aggregate article could contain the necessary information. Editors should trim or transwiki excessive or unverifiable details prior to the creation of a spinout article, as this may remove the need to create this spinout article. Further details on writing and creating spinout articles can be found in the Summary style approach section of Manual of Style (Writing about Fiction).

Summary style approach for spinout articles

If a main article is concise but still becomes too long, then it may be appropriate to remove details by creating succinct spinout articles. For fictional works, these spinout articles are typically lists of characters or other elements that usually rely on the coverage of the parent topic, and may lack demonstration of real-world coverage through sources dedicated specifically to those elements. A spinout article on a single character or element that lacks sources of real-world coverage may be appropriate when the amount of content for that element would be distracting or otherwise too long within a parent topic or spinout article, as described by summary style. It is usually inappropriate to spin out an element or elements from a spinout article that lacks real-world coverage.

Editors are cautioned to not immediately create spinout articles that lack real-world coverage, even if such articles exist for a similar fictional work. Editors should trim or transwiki excessive or unverifiable details prior to the creation of a spinout article, as this may remove the need to create this spinout article. Articles on singular fictional elements lacking sources describing real-world coverage may be contested by other editors as they create undue weight on a non-notable aspect of a work and may be seen as excessive plot details; more often, the contents of such an articles can be included into some grouping ("Characters", "Setting", or the like) within a spinout article list of the notable parent topic.

Spinout articles should be judged as if it were still a section of the parent article, and identified in the lead section as an article covering elements within a fictional work. Like all Wikipedia articles, spinout articles are edited in accordance with our policies and guidelines; specifically, content in spinout articles must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources. Such sources can include primary sources - such as the work of fiction itself or commentary from the author or other involved parties - in addition to real-world content from secondary sources. Editors should strive to establish notability by providing as much real-world content as possible for these spinout articles.

After starting a spinout article, editors should create redirection pages for the topics covered within the spinout article, as well as update appropriate disambiguation pages when a naming conflict occurs, to make searching for those topics easier.

Further details on writing and creating spinout articles can be found in the Summary style approach section of Manual of Style (Writing about Fiction).

Depth of coverage

Articles on fiction should be structured around evaluations and critiques of the work or topic, with an appropriate balance of plot information, as outlined at Manual of Style (Writing about fiction). The size of a plot summary is often determined by building consensus for each article on a case by case basis. Editors should compare approaches taken on featured and good articles about fiction for examples of length and tone.

Depth of coverage within an article should be guided by the amount of information which can be sourced. A single movie, book, video game, or other work of fiction has most likely not generated large coverage in sources which Wikipedia can summarize. Therefore, the article will be able to summarize those sources in one article. On the other hand, a series of books, television shows, or video games could have a commonality of elements which are better covered in a spinout article, helping to provide suitable background and supplementary information for each work within the series. However, articles about individual elements (i.e. a specific character or location) or individual segments of serialized works (i.e. episodes of a television program or issues of a comic book) should establish individual notability as opposed to inherited notability. At times, better depth of coverage may be accomplished by combining notable and non-notable elements into a single topic, such as a character cast or a single season of a television show instead of individual elements. WikiProjects that deal with fiction have guidelines describing what depth of coverage should be provided for plot information relative to the length of the original work. The complexity of the work should also be taken into a consideration; uses of certain creative elements (such as time travel or flashbacks) may require more detail to clearly explain the concepts in an encyclopedic manner.

If there is an imbalance of fictional information in an article, consider trimming the text or moving the fictional information to an appropriate GFDL-compatible Wiki.

Articles on fictional topics that lack demonstrated notability should be improved either by adding demonstrated notability, or by other editing actions such as trimming, merging, or moving content to another Wiki. Nevertheless, the lack of demonstrated notability is not one of the criteria for speedy deletion, and good faith improvements are expected as part of the editing process. Editors should review specific guidelines or approaches outlined in the appropriate WikiProject, such as Wikiproject Television or WikiProject Films. Other concerns about dealing with fictional notability can be raised at the Fiction-related Noticeboard.

Here are additional suggestions to improve articles that lack demonstration of notability:

• If you believe the article will never have a chance of demonstrating notability or cannot be merged elsewhere, and that its deletion is unlikely to be contested, place the article up for proposed deletion. An article about a character in a TV show that only appeared on-screen for a few seconds and is never referred to otherwise is probably non-notable; however, by using the proposed deletion process, someone may be able to provide the required notability. If you are unsure if this is the correct step, then do not perform this step.
• If you can provide reliably sourced, verifiable information on real-world facets that establish the notability of the topic, be bold and include it in the article.
• Inform the editors of the article on the article's talk page of your concern about the lack of notability. This can also be done by tagging the article with the {{notability}} tag on the article page, though it is recommended to discuss your concerns with the editors as well in this case. If many such articles within the same fictional universe exist in a similar state, attempt to find a project or task force page for that fictional work and let the editors there know your concerns.
• If the article can be grouped with an existing article or other articles on the same type of fictional elements, then it may be appropriate to discuss a potential merge. This may require that information be trimmed from the article. If articles are merged, leave redirection pages in their place to the appropriate page, and link the old article or articles in your edit summary to comply with the GFDL. Consider using redirection templates to help track such redirects. You can boldly merge articles, but consensus will often be required before major changes are accepted by the community.
• If an existing GFDL-compatible wiki for the fictional topic exists, suggest transwiki'ing the information. Again, articles that are moved should be replaced with redirection pages.
• If the above options have been considered and determined to not be possible or if you feel that any action taken has not remedied the situation, it may be appropriate to nominate the article for deletion where the merits of the article can be debated. However, this should be considered carefully for an article that otherwise does not violate any further Wikipedia policies or guidelines such as those regarding original research or verifiability.

Editors are cautioned against performing the above actions on numerous articles en masse; an Arbitration Committee case stated that editors are "urged to work collaboratively and constructively with the broader community and the editors committed to working on the articles".

Wikibooks, Wikipedia's sibling project, contains instructional and educational texts. These include annotated works of fiction (on the Wikibooks:annotated texts bookshelf) for classroom or private study use. Wikisource, similarly, holds original public domain and GFDL source texts. See Wikisource:Wikisource and Wikibooks. One possible action to consider is to make use of all of the Wikimedia projects combined: to have an encyclopedia article about the work of fiction on Wikipedia giving a brief outline, a chapter-by-chapter annotation on Wikibooks, the full source text on Wikisource (if the work is in the public domain), and interwiki links joining them all together into a whole. However, Wikibooks opposes books on fiction, so it is not an appropriate place to transwiki large quantities of fictional material.

Fictional material unsuited or too detailed for Wikipedia can be transwikied to a appropriate GFDL-compatible wiki, such as Wookieepedia or the Gaming Wiki; editors should check with related Wikiprojects to determine if a specific wiki has been selected for transwiking materials. Any transwikied material should be edited to meet the guidelines of specific wikis.

• For examples of high quality fiction articles, see the articles that have been rated as Good and Featured.
• Wikipedia:Fancruft
• Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Check your fiction
• Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)
• WikiProject Films guidelines on plot summaries
• WikiProject Novels guidelines on plot summaries
• WikiProject Soap Operas guidelines on character articles
• Wikipedia:Television episodes