Hello All, Just now, I listened in to the GLAM topic: "How to improve our work on notability? Librarians' case" in the Wikimania 2024 day 3 session.
I was shocked to hear of stories where well written articles were rejected because of a so called "single source" conflation. I'd like to remind everyone and also point out that there's unclear messaging happening and some administrators using the unclear messaging in the WP:GNG as reasoning for well-written and single source cited articles. This is what I posted in the chat during the session: ---- THAD: It seems like if a good case can be made that an article provides additional structure for another topic that can be crosslinked to an article, AND provide at least 1 source, it should be allowed. I've heard that only a single source is often used to say "not notable enough" for acceptance. But there is indeed this clause in the WP:GNG, that says 1 source is enough: "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected" I encourage any GLAM contributor to bring up that quote. This was solved and agreed upon over 12 years ago. A single source is enough. The problem is that the original clause (which is still there) is overshadowed by a previous sentence at the beginning of the WP:GNG saying: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received 'significant coverage' in reliable sources ..." Note it says "significant coverage" in reliable sources. But that is contradictory to the original clause where there is "no fixed number of sources required". In my opinion, the phrase "significant coverage" should be removed from the beginning of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline And thereby the original clause brings with it much more clear understanding. ---- What say we? Thad Guidry user: thadguidry _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/Y4PKFD6A4LOVZ6SICLSOKNSKFIR3RU4U/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
