History Administrivia / ThereIsNoSuchThingAsNotability

6th Jan '18 1:03:39 PM SeptimusHeap
Is there an issue? Send a Message


!Notability itself is not notable

Yes, we mean that phrasing. Critical ratings, "top X" rankings, popularity, revenue, awards, and other statistical facts about a work's public reception are not our primary purpose. The cultural impact of a work is interesting information; in that context, awards, sales figures, or popularity rankings may be relevant. Definitely talk about that (briefly). But bare information like how much it grossed and how many critics liked isn't what we're for.

!Verifiability is important

The main reason that we require DarthWiki/UnpublishedWorks to sit in their own section of the site is because it's impossible to verify that what their creator says about them is true. While notability is not a standard we apply, ''verifiability'' is. It should be possible for an interested third party to find a work that's documented on our wiki and see for themselves the tropes that we've said are present. This means that works that are inaccessible to the general public (on private servers, requiring private invitations, and the like) should not be documented on our wiki unless there's a [legal] public version available. [[note]]Closed alpha and beta versions of games are considered "unpublished", but we allow articles for them as long as they contain only content that's publicly released.[[/note]]




!Non-examples are ''not'' always notable

While most forms of PlayingWithATrope abide by this rule, AvertedTrope is an exception. See [[AvertedTrope its page]] for more on this.
4th Jan '18 4:53:30 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

!Non-examples are ''not'' always notable

While most forms of PlayingWithATrope abide by this rule, AvertedTrope is an exception. See [[AvertedTrope its page]] for more on this.
4th Mar '17 8:53:07 AM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


The main reason that we require UnpublishedWorks to sit in their own section of the site is because it's impossible to verify that what their creator says about them is true. While notability is not a standard we apply, ''verifiability'' is. It should be possible for an interested third party to find a work that's documented on our wiki and see for themselves the tropes that we've said are present. This means that works that are inaccessible to the general public (on private servers, requiring private invitations, and the like) should not be documented on our wiki unless there's a [legal] public version available. [[note]]Closed alpha and beta versions of games are considered "unpublished", but we allow articles for them as long as they contain only content that's publicly released.[[/note]]

to:

The main reason that we require UnpublishedWorks DarthWiki/UnpublishedWorks to sit in their own section of the site is because it's impossible to verify that what their creator says about them is true. While notability is not a standard we apply, ''verifiability'' is. It should be possible for an interested third party to find a work that's documented on our wiki and see for themselves the tropes that we've said are present. This means that works that are inaccessible to the general public (on private servers, requiring private invitations, and the like) should not be documented on our wiki unless there's a [legal] public version available. [[note]]Closed alpha and beta versions of games are considered "unpublished", but we allow articles for them as long as they contain only content that's publicly released.[[/note]]
3rd Mar '17 8:47:07 AM Fighteer
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:



Added DiffLines:

!Verifiability is important

The main reason that we require UnpublishedWorks to sit in their own section of the site is because it's impossible to verify that what their creator says about them is true. While notability is not a standard we apply, ''verifiability'' is. It should be possible for an interested third party to find a work that's documented on our wiki and see for themselves the tropes that we've said are present. This means that works that are inaccessible to the general public (on private servers, requiring private invitations, and the like) should not be documented on our wiki unless there's a [legal] public version available. [[note]]Closed alpha and beta versions of games are considered "unpublished", but we allow articles for them as long as they contain only content that's publicly released.[[/note]]
18th Feb '17 7:01:01 AM Madrugada
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Yes, we mean that phrasing. Critical ratings, "top X" rankings, popularity, revenue, awards, and other statistical facts about a work's public reception are not something we care about. This means that you should not add that information to the description, nor should you make indexes for "songs that were on the Billboard Top 200" or "actors with Oscar awards".

The cultural impact of a work is interesting information. Definitely talk about that (briefly). But information like how much it grossed and how many critics liked it can go on Wikipedia. That's not what we're for.

to:

Yes, we mean that phrasing. Critical ratings, "top X" rankings, popularity, revenue, awards, and other statistical facts about a work's public reception are not something we care about. This means that you should not add that information to the description, nor should you make indexes for "songs that were on the Billboard Top 200" or "actors with Oscar awards".

our primary purpose. The cultural impact of a work is interesting information.information; in that context, awards, sales figures, or popularity rankings may be relevant. Definitely talk about that (briefly). But bare information like how much it grossed and how many critics liked it can go on Wikipedia. That's not isn't what we're for.
16th Feb '17 8:56:20 PM Fighteer
Is there an issue? Send a Message


![[AC: All works are notable.]]

to:

![[AC: All !All works are notable.]]
notable.



![[AC:By, For, and About Fans]]

to:

![[AC:By, For, !By, for, and About Fans]]
about fans



![[AC:Just Because It's Notable Doesn't Mean It's Safe To Host]]

to:

![[AC:Just Because It's Notable Doesn't Mean It's Safe To Host]]
!Notability itself is not notable
Yes, we mean that phrasing. Critical ratings, "top X" rankings, popularity, revenue, awards, and other statistical facts about a work's public reception are not something we care about. This means that you should not add that information to the description, nor should you make indexes for "songs that were on the Billboard Top 200" or "actors with Oscar awards".

The cultural impact of a work is interesting information. Definitely talk about that (briefly). But information like how much it grossed and how many critics liked it can go on Wikipedia. That's not what we're for.

!Just because it's notable doesn't mean it's safe to host
29th Jan '16 2:48:11 PM SolipSchism
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Much of our wiki relies on the "Examples" section, where we pull our many articles together. Every now and then you might see a WikipediaUpdater who will delete your example with no reason. A small EditWar of delete/restore will start, before someone on the discussion page brings up "notability." This page is your response.

to:

Much of our wiki relies on the "Examples" section, where we pull our many articles together. Every now and then you might see a WikipediaUpdater who will delete your example with no reason. A small EditWar Administrivia/EditWar of delete/restore will start, before someone on the discussion page brings up "notability." This page is your response.
14th Oct '14 10:22:52 AM FastEddie
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Wikipedia tries in many regards to be the opposite of what we are. We want to be fun, interesting and a cool place to [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife sink hours of time]]. Wikipedia wants to be a compilation of previously published facts from respected sources. SeriousBusiness. Presented with a choice between serious and fun, we went with fun.

to:

Wikipedia tries in many regards to be the opposite of what we are. We want to be fun, interesting and a cool place to [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife sink hours of time]].time. Wikipedia wants to be a compilation of previously published facts from respected sources. SeriousBusiness. Presented with a choice between serious and fun, we went with fun.
14th Oct '14 10:21:08 AM FastEddie
Is there an issue? Send a Message


We have examples ranging from media as diverse as {{Film}} to FanFiction and everything in between. Removing tropes, examples... anything... because of "notability" stifles the wiki. It can intimidate new writers who wanted to put in an example they liked and had it shot down. Hell, tropes are ''defined'' by their examples.

to:

We have examples ranging from media as diverse as {{Film}} to FanFiction and everything in between. Removing tropes, examples... anything... because of "notability" stifles the wiki. It can intimidate new writers who wanted to put in an example they liked and had it shot down. Hell, tropes are ''defined'' by their examples.\n
9th Jun '14 4:17:17 AM Spyspotter
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Wikipedia tries in many regards to be the opposite of what we are. We want to be fun, interesting and a cool place to [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife sink hours of time]]. Wikipedia wants to be a compilation of previously published facts from respected sources. Serious business. Presented with a choice between serious and fun, we went with fun.

to:

Wikipedia tries in many regards to be the opposite of what we are. We want to be fun, interesting and a cool place to [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife sink hours of time]]. Wikipedia wants to be a compilation of previously published facts from respected sources. Serious business.SeriousBusiness. Presented with a choice between serious and fun, we went with fun.
This list shows the last 10 events of 15. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Administrivia.ThereIsNoSuchThingAsNotability