articles for creation questionnaire demo

demo flow

step 1/3

What is your article about?






Please select an article type.

What is the name of the person?

Please fill in all required fields.

Wikipedia has guidelines that decide whether a subject merits an article. A good rule of thumb for this is, if an editor can find 3 reliable and independent sources about the subject, then the subject is notable enough to merit an article.

more details, and tips

A good source is...

  • reliable - the source is credible and trustworthy, and should have a reputation. think nbc news, or the new york times. sources with no reputation are usually not reliable.
  • independent - the source is not affiliated with the subject, eg not a press release from the subject's company, or a blog post from the subject's friend. interviews, and the subject's own blogs don't establish notability.
  • significant - the source is about the subject, and is not about something else. think a news article about the subject, not a news article about the subject's dog, the subject's family, or the subject's friends. the source should be entirely or largely about the subject.


Sadly, this person likely does not merit an article on wikipedia, as they are only famous for one event, by Wikipedia's BLP1E policy. If you want to learn more, you can read the relevant policy(the WP:BIO), or you can post a message to the teahouse to ask more experienced editors for help.

You may still create a draft, but be cautioned that without established notability, your draft may be denied or deleted.

Sadly, this subject likely does not merit an article on wikipedia, as the sources you provided are not reliable.

You can try again with different sources, or you can post a message to the teahouse to ask more experienced editors for help.

You may still create a draft, but be cautioned that without established notability, your draft may be denied or deleted.

congratulations! This subject is likely notable enough to merit an article on wikipedia.

You can now submit your article to wikipedia.

why?

a problem with the current afc process is that there are an abundance of drafts that have no sources at all and are obviously non-notable, and the creators of the drafts don't have knowledge of the notablity guidelines, resulting in the draft being rejected, and likely speedily deleted. this turns off the draft writers, who has had their hard work deleted off wikipedia, and buries well-written drafts in the gigantic AFC backlog.

how does this help?

most newer editors don't have knowledge about the notablity guidelines, and telling them to "just read the policy" isn't helpful, especially when the policy is long and complex. asking a editor to find 3 reliable sources instead is much more hands-on, and simpler to do.

why does it use the rsp? i thought it wasn't "a representative sample of all sources used on Wikipedia or all sources in existence"

The RSP is a representative sample of all sources used on Wikipedia or all sources in existence. /s

the RSP is just used for the sake of the demo, and a better solution will be implemented if this is accepted.