User:Masem/wp-fict-proposed


 * For articles about books and films, rather than characters and locations therein, please refer to the guidelines Notability (books) and Notability (films).

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) within a work of fiction.

Defining notability for fiction
This guideline is a detailed extension of two excerpts:

From What Wikipedia is not: "Wikipedia articles on published works (such as fictional stories) should contain 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. A brief plot summary may be appropriate as an aspect of a larger topic."

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

For articles about fictional concepts, reliable sources can cover information such as sales figures, critical and popular reception, development, cultural impact, and merchandise; this information describes the real-world aspects of the concept, so it is real-world content. Fictional content refers to descriptions of the work's plot, characters, location, objects, and other aspects of the fictional setting provided by the work of fiction.

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. However, notability for individual topics on fiction should be judged on a case-by-case basis with considerations for Wikipedia's core policies of verifibility, no original research and neutral point of view.

This guideline describes how to provide real-world notability for fictional topics and appropriate depth of coverage of fictional information, and how to resolve issues for topics that fail to meet these guidelines. For information on how to structure and write articles on fictional works and topics, please refer to Manual of Style (Writing about fiction).

<!--

Reasoning behind this guideline
Strictly speaking, the policy of What Wikipedia is not#PLOT and the guideline of notability already set a standard for what topics are suitable for inclusion within Wikipedia; this guideline does not attempt to strengthen or relax these core principles. However, as Wikipedia is not the same a traditional printed encyclopedia, Wikipedia has the capability of covering topics that would not be normally covered in a printed edition. This includes topics on many modern and popular fictional works which, prior and external to Wikipedia, have received voluminous coverage by Internet users through Usenet and the World wide web. While Wikipedia does not discourage topics on these works, editors must take care to distill such information into encyclopedic form as to provide a real-world understanding alongside abbreviated plot information to provide context for the real-world aspects. This ensures that topics of current popularity are reasonably presented according to their persisting significance. Without proper trimming and condensing of this information, incorporation of such extensive knowledge into Wikipedia may lead to "cruft" which fails to meet Wikipedia's policies and other guidelines.

Thus, this guideline does not alter any existing guideline, but serves to aid editors in writing, editing, and handling articles on fictional works and topics within those fictional works in order to generate high quality encyclopedic articles &mdash; ones that provide minimal but sufficient plot information to support the demonstration of the topic's real-world notability and can be understood by a reader otherwise unfamiliar with the fictional work.

When Wikipedia was founded, part of the visionary statements made by Jimbo Wales and others associated with the work included the concept that because Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, it can cover a much broader range of topics than traditional encyclopedias, particularly in the area of fictional works. As quoted from the original essay, "There is no reason why there shouldn't be a page for every Simpsons character, and even a table listing every episode, all neatly cross-linked and introduced by a shorter central page. Every episode name in the list could link to a separate page for each of those episodes, with links to reviews and trivia." However, as Wikipedia is a dynamic system driven by its user base and by the Wikimedia Foundation, consensus can change for what is considered appropriate topics and coverage within Wikipedia, and has led to the present versions of The Five Pillars of Wikipedia, of which both the present version of What Wikipedia is not#PLOT and notability are based on. Articles that previously were appropriate under previous policies and guidelines may no longer meet current ones. However, editors should not be quick to simply delete these works; while they may not be appropriately notable per current policy, older articles likely have several merits such as detailed summary of the primary work that should not simply be deleted on sight. Instead, such articles should be given time to improve the content of such articles in order to provide a balance of plot summaries alongside demonstrated real-world notability, to merge into existing works, or to move without changes to other wikis to preserve the quality of editing that has been established in those works. Outright deletion of articles should be the absolute last resort when dealing with non-notable works. -->

Demonstrating notability for fictional topics
Articles dealing with a work of fiction (a book, movie, television series, video game, or other medium) should be able to readily demonstrate notability by citing critical reception, viewership or sales figures, history and 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. While data such as actors or voice actors, people involved with production, publication or airing dates, and length of work can be taken from reliable sources, such information does not demonstrate notability.

To support the understanding of the work's notability, it is generally accepted to provide a concise plot summary of the work. For longer works or those in episodic or serial format, it may be necessary, as part of the plot summary, to provide additional "fictional" information on individual characters, the setting, or unique terms and concepts that only exist within the fictional universe. Normally, these fictional elements are described as part of the plot within the main article for the fictional work and do not need to demonstrate notability on their own.

Notable topics merit individual articles
Fictional elements, such as characters and locations, as well as for individual episodes or entries for serial works, may be able to assert their own notability, either transcending the context of the original fictional work (such as Superman), or within the context of the work of fiction (Troy McClure, Spoo). In these cases, it is very reasonable and recommended per summary style to create new articles for these aspects, along with the demonstration of notability appropriate for the topic. In some cases, notability of fictional topics is better demonstrated for a common group than in individual articles for each topic (Characters of Final Fantasy VIII, Characters of Carnivàle, Smallville (season 1)).

Summary style approach for sub-articles
For articles on fictional works, even with concise discussion of fictional elements, the main article may become too long (such as The Lord of the Rings). In this case, it is appropriate to also use summary style to create sub-articles to remove some details from the main article page. For fictional works, these sub-articles are typically lists of characters or other elements from the fictional universe that typically do not demonstrate notability on their own and rely on the notability of the main fictional work. Sub-articles about a singular topic should only be used when appropriate; in general, singular topics either have demonstrated their own notability, or can be merged into the main article or existing sub-articles. These articles exist to help provide minimal but sufficient background for a complete understanding of the main work of fiction or any other notable sub-topics that may extend from it while aiding in following Wikipedia's manual of style.

Editors are strongly urged to use consensus to determine the need to create such sub-articles as necessary; such articles should not be created until it is determined that the parent article is too long.

Further details on writing such sub-articles, and when such sub-articles should be created, can be found in Summary style approach section of Manual of Style (Writing about Fiction).

Depth of coverage
When writing articles on fictional elements of a fictional work, one must consider to what depth that coverage of the fictional works that these sub-articles should provide. Articles should be structured around the notable aspects of the work or topic, as outlined at Manual of Style (Writing about fiction). The provided fictional information for a fictional topic should be in balance with this. There is no exact ratio of fictional to real-world information; instead, this balance should be based on common sense and judged on a case-by-case basis for each article. Editors are encouraged to review Featured and Good Articles on fictional works to gauge this balance.

The depth of coverage should also be appropriate for the size or length of the work in addition to notable information. A singular work of fiction (such as a single movie, a book, or video game) should rarely require a sub-article to describe parts, covering these details in the main article. On the other hand, a book, TV, or video game series may benefit by having a few common fictional element lists that can help 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. Various WikiProjects that deal with fiction have guidelines describing what depth of coverage should be provided for fictional information relative to the length of the original work.

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.

Dealing with non-notable fictional topics
Articles on fictional topics that lack demonstrated notability should strive for improvement either by the addition of demonstrated notability, or through other editing actions such as trimming, merging, or moving the bulk of the content to another wiki. Please note that the lack of demonstrated notability is not a criteria for speedy deletion, nor is there any deadline to improve such articles, though good faith improvements are expected as part of the editing process.

In general, editors are suggested to review specific guidelines or approaches outlined in the appropriate WikiProject for the topic at hand, such as Wikiproject Television or WikiProject Films.

Barring such additional approaches, the followings are a list of suggested methods to help improve articles that lack demonstration of notability.


 * If, by good faith, you believe the article will never have a chance of demonstrating notability or cannot be merged elsewhere, 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 very likely non-notable, however, by using the proposed deletion process, someone may be able provide the required notability.  If you are unsure if this is the correct step for a given article, then do not perform this step.
 * If you can provide such information on real-world facets or notability, 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 possible, suggest routes for the editors for merging or moving the information should notability and real-world information be difficult to find.
 * Once informed or tagged, if no good faith efforts to seek out or include notability information are made within a reasonable editing timeframe (typically no less than a month) determine what should be done with the article:
 * If the article can be grouped with an existing article or other articles on the same type of fictional elements, suggest a merge via discussion. This may require that information be trimmed from the article.  If articles are merged, leave redirection pages in their place to the appropriate page.
 * 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 both of the above options have been considered and determined to not be possible, only then consider recommending the article for deletion where the merits of the article can be debated. However, this should be considered as the final resort for any article that otherwise does not violate any other Wikipedia policies.  It may be necessary to approach a larger group of editors (a parent WikiProject or the like) to help obtain consensus prior to placing the article up for deletion.

Editors are cautioned from performing the above actions on several articles en masse. A recent ArbCom case suggests that if an editor feels several related articles fail to meet notability requirements, they should open discussion first with the editors of such articles (typically at a WikiProject page) prior to initiating actions such as merging all articles to a single one or the like.

Relocating non-notable fictional material
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 the appropriate GFDL-compatible wiki, such as Final Fantasy Wikia and Wookieepedia. Other sites, such as Gaming Wiki, may also accept material. Transwikied material should be edited to meet the guidelines of specific wikis; do not just copy and paste.