위키백과:중요성 입증

(위키백과:중요에서 넘어옴)

위키백과의 빠른 삭제 기준 중 A7, A9, A11는 특정 문서가 (다른 조건이 각 삭제 기준에 존재하더라도) "중요성을 입증하지 않을 경우" 삭제될 수 있다고 적혀 있습니다. 사용자들은 이 기준들에 대해 혼동을 겪고, 이것이 무슨 의미인지를 질문했을 것입니다.

중요성은 등재 기준보다는 느슨한 기준입니다. 신뢰할 수 있는 2차 출처를 포함하는 것 자체가 중요성을 나타내는 것일 수 있지만, 출처를 전혀 포함하고 있지 않다는 것은 빠른 삭제 기준을 만족하는지에 대한 평가와 전적으로 관련이 없습니다.

중요성 입증을 확인하기편집

A credible claim of significance can be assessed in an article in two broad ways:

  1. One, search for a statement within the article that attributes noteworthiness to the subject; for example: "John Doe is the State President of the Democratic Party in Tasmania", or "John Doe was the first cricketer to bat left-handed", or "The John Doe recording debuted at #5 on Billboard charts", or "This invention won the National Medal of Technology and Innovation". The existence of such a statement of noteworthiness/importance/significance within the article would generally ensure that the A7, A9 and A11 tags cannot be applied. Such a claim of noteworthiness need not be supported by any reference; the fact that such a claim exists, deems that the A7, A9 and A11 tags cannot be applied (an editor can still opt to PROD the article or take it to AFD if they believe that the article, despite its claim, is not broadly notable and should still be deleted). At the same time, if the claim is evidently false (for example, if initial research confirms that it is Jane Doe and not John Doe who is the State President of the Democratic Party in Tasmania), the article may be tagged for speedy deletion as a hoax, or alternatively prodded.
  2. Two, if there is no evident claim of significance in the article, check the references provided within the article. If the references within the article discuss the subject or provide a possible claim of significance as discussed in #1 above, then too the A7, A9 and A11 tags should not be applied. For example, if the new article contains just one line: "John Doe is a fitness trainer", the initial view might be that there is no claim of significance. But if the sources in the same article discuss the subject, chances are, more coverage may exist; and in this case too, the A7, A9 and A11 tags should generally not be applied (except when it's clear that this is all the coverage this subject will ever get).

While the responsibility to provide such a claim of significance (either in words or in references) rests with the person adding the article/material, good form dictates that any new page patroller conducts at least some rudimentary search on their own before tagging any new article on any speedy criteria.

피해야 할 착오편집

The following are important points to keep in mind about significance:

  1. A claim of significance need not be supported by any cited sources, much less by inline citations to reliable sources.
  2. A claim of significance need not amount to a statement that, if sourced, would establish notability.
  3. Therefore, a claim of significance need not pass any of the general or specialized notability guidelines, such as general notability guideline, music notability, or biography notability guideline.
  4. A claim of significance need not be self-evidently true, but should not be blatantly false. A blatant hoax, or a claim so improbable that no one of sound mind would believe it, is not a plausible claim of significance—use {{db-hoax}} for those.
  5. Any statement which, if reliably sourced, would be likely to persuade some of the commentators at a typical articles for deletion discussion to keep the article is a claim of significance.
  6. Any statement which plausibly indicates that additional research (possibly offline, possibly in specialized sources) has a reasonable chance of demonstrating notability is a claim of significance.

두 가지 검정편집

"Credible claim of significance" is a two-part test: credible and significant. A good mental test is to consider each part discretely:

a) is this reasonably plausible?

b) assuming this were true, would this (or something that "this" might plausibly imply) cause a person to be notable? Or, in line with point 6 above, does it give plausible indications that research might well discover notability?

So, a claim that the person is the King of Mars would satisfy b, since a person who's King of Mars would almost certainly have coverage in sources that would constitute notability, but of course it fails a, since it's not plausible. Conversely, an article describing a subject whose main claim to fame is that they've been the top of their class for the last four years would pass a, since it's quite plausible for that to be true, but not pass b, since that kind of thing is not likely to lead to notability.

이후에 벌어지는 일편집

당신이 중요성을 입증할 수 있는 내용이 포함된 한 문서를 발견하였으나, 그 문서가 위키백과에 어울리지 않는다고 생각할 수 있습니다. 그러한 경우에 대해서는 빠른 삭제를 요청하지 마시고 다음의 경우를 고려해 보세요.