User:Masem/Fict-essay

The notability of elements of fiction (such as characters, television episodes, settings, and vehicles) as to determine if an element should have a standalone article is difficult to assess due to the number of different viewpoints on the treatment of fiction in an encyclopedic manner. Because of this, the notability of elements of fiction should be evaluated by consensus on a case by case basis though several rules-of-thumb are provided below.

In general, if an element of fiction meets the general notability guideline&mdash;"significant coverage in secondary sources"&mdash;the element is considered notable and merits its own article.

However, from observations made from discussions at articles for deletion, articles on elements of fiction may be kept even if they don't meet the general notability guideline. While there are no strong criteria for determining when this occurs, the following areas are typically areas of concern when an article is reviewed for deletion:
 * Sourcing: An article on an element of fiction will likely be retained if it uses many independent, third-party sources that describe the work from a "real-world" perspective, including analysis, criticism, reception, and legacy. Sources from the creators, such as through interviews and DVD commentary, can typically help augment these sources, though articles that rely only on these sources may be merged or deleted; furthermore, editors should be aware of concerns with self-published sources. Articles that rely only on the primary source are often merged or deleted, as per Wikipedia is not a collection of plot summaries.
 * Importance of the Work: Articles on elements of fiction from culturally-important works will likely be kept over those of works that may be notable themselves but have a small impact on the culture.
 * Importance to the Work: Articles on major characters or on episodes that have a strong impact on the overall story of a work of fiction will likely be kept over minor characters or those episodes that do little to advance the plot.
 * Writing Style: While writing style concerns are not a reason for deletion, articles without good sourcing and written in an in-universe aspect will likely be brought for deletion over those articles that may have similar poor sourcing but written in an out-of-universe fashion. Ultimately, though, both articles will likely be considered for deletion.
 * Article potential: Though all articles should be considered works in progress, the potential for an article on an element of fiction to gain additional sources as to approach the general notability guideline is a factor considered in deletion. In certain cases, one can look at other articles on elements of fiction from the same work to judge if the potential is there; for example, as most The Simpsons from past seasons are able to meet the general notability guidelines, it is presumed that recently aired episodes will also eventually meet this, and are kept. A major character that spans many different works (such as a lead video game character) may also assume to have potential due to the volume of information on the individual works. On the other hand, an episode from a television show that is no longer on the air and had a small number of seasons will likely not gain additional sources to expand the article.

While these factors can be used to drive a case-by-case discussion for consensus, editors are cautioned from keeping such discussions to a small group of editors. A group of editors that are strongly interested in a specific work of fiction will likely come to a consensus that retains more articles on elements of fiction than a more open consensus would allow. Editors should seek outside advice such as at the Fiction-related topics noticeboard or specific Wikiprojects to gain advice. While articles may be proposed for deletion to also gain this larger discussion, editors are strongly encouraged to seek other routes towards consensus before approaching the route of deletion.

There are a large number of existing articles on elements of fiction that were generated during Wikipedia's early growth years, prior to the current concerns of notability (circa 2006). While many of these articles would presently fail the above areas, editors are warned that bold merges or deletions of such articles can be seen to be problematic. Instead, editors should work with individual authors and WikiProjects to suggest a way to improve these articles, including improving sourcing, merging content to a larger topic, and deleting any trivial topics within the scope of the work of fiction.

On the other hand, editors are discouraged from creating new articles on elements of fiction that do not clearly satisfy the above areas. Per advice from Writing About Fiction and Summary Style approaches, new articles should not be spun out until their notability can be readily shown via sourcing or obvious potential for expansion. Newer articles that clearly fail the above areas will more likely be deleted than those that have existed for some time (due to being seen on New Page Patrols). Editors, if in question on whether a new article on an element of fiction should be created, should be encouraged to create the new article in their own sandbox and bring the results forward for review instead of writing the article in mainspace first.

In nearly every case, an article on an element of fiction that fails to be notable through consensus should not be outright deleted, but instead merged into a larger topic, with a redirection page left behind to retain the page's history while allowing the element of fiction to be a discovered through a search. While there is no guideline that allows or disallows such pages, lists of major characters and lists of episodes are generally allowable as a means of grouping elements of fiction if the main article on the work of fiction is too large. However, editors are encouraged to find third-party and secondary sources to support these lists, as such lists may still be deleted if consensus determines they are too indiscriminate. Editors may also consider transwiki of information to another GFDL-compatible wiki to retain the information if they feel this to be necessary.