Ikwipedia:Notability: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
EnWikiAdmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
For a topic to have an article, it must be both | For a topic to have an article, it must be both notable and have [[Ikwipedia:Acceptable sources|acceptable sources]] that can be cited to support the descriptions of it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability As in Wikipedia], if there are no acceptable sources for a subject, it is not sufficiently notable and there should not be an article on it. | ||
==Inherent notability of [[Ikwipedia:Hypothesis of Ikwipedia|hypothesis]]-adjacent topics== | ==Inherent notability of [[Ikwipedia:Hypothesis of Ikwipedia|hypothesis]]-adjacent topics== | ||
Certain topics are so paradigm-shifting that they are '''inherently notable''', even if they have insufficient reliable-source coverage to have a Wikipedia page. Such topics include: | Certain topics are so paradigm-shifting that they are '''inherently notable''', even if they have insufficient reliable-source coverage to have a Wikipedia page. Such topics include: | ||
'' | :''paranormal phenomena:'' people, places, events, things, entities, and concepts; evidence of the existence of [[non-human intelligent beings]], etc. | ||
'' | :''speculative concepts:'' unproven concepts such as alleged [[exotic technologies]]. | ||
'' | :''major wrongdoing of public concern:'' [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy theories]] based on [[Ikwipedia:Testimonial accounts|testimonial accounts]]; [[false flag]]s; alleged [[systemic-deception theory|systemic deception]]s of all kinds; etc. | ||
The mere existence of a claim regarding these topics warrants documentation of the topic of the claim, regardless of whether it can be verified by a particular standard. | The mere existence of a claim regarding these topics warrants documentation of the topic of the claim, regardless of whether it can be verified by a particular standard. Documenting these topics in an encyclopedic way synthesizes the available claims about them and shows how they interrelate, which helps to provide a more clear understanding of a [[Ikwipedia:Hypothesis of Ikwipedia|coherent framework that accounts for them all, if such a framework exists]]. | ||
==Limitations== | ==Limitations== | ||
This permissive notability standard does not necessarily extend to all topics. Content | This permissive notability standard does not necessarily extend to all topics. Content which would not be found in a comparable Wikipedia article — even on an otherwise-notable subject and supported by otherwise-reliable sources, such as claims that primarily concern public figures' private lives — and which is not paradigm-shifting in the sense described is most likely not notable unless it specifically relates to inherently notable topics. |
Revision as of 01:51, 17 November 2024
For a topic to have an article, it must be both notable and have acceptable sources that can be cited to support the descriptions of it. As in Wikipedia, if there are no acceptable sources for a subject, it is not sufficiently notable and there should not be an article on it.
Inherent notability of hypothesis-adjacent topics
Certain topics are so paradigm-shifting that they are inherently notable, even if they have insufficient reliable-source coverage to have a Wikipedia page. Such topics include:
- paranormal phenomena: people, places, events, things, entities, and concepts; evidence of the existence of non-human intelligent beings, etc.
- speculative concepts: unproven concepts such as alleged exotic technologies.
- major wrongdoing of public concern: conspiracy theories based on testimonial accounts; false flags; alleged systemic deceptions of all kinds; etc.
The mere existence of a claim regarding these topics warrants documentation of the topic of the claim, regardless of whether it can be verified by a particular standard. Documenting these topics in an encyclopedic way synthesizes the available claims about them and shows how they interrelate, which helps to provide a more clear understanding of a coherent framework that accounts for them all, if such a framework exists.
Limitations
This permissive notability standard does not necessarily extend to all topics. Content which would not be found in a comparable Wikipedia article — even on an otherwise-notable subject and supported by otherwise-reliable sources, such as claims that primarily concern public figures' private lives — and which is not paradigm-shifting in the sense described is most likely not notable unless it specifically relates to inherently notable topics.