Wikipedia:Too soon
This is an essay on notability. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
| This page in a nutshell: Sometimes it's simply just too soon for a topic to have an article. |
While there are topics that might arguably merit an article, sometimes it is simply too soon. Generally speaking, the various notability criteria that guide editors in creating articles require that the topic being considered be itself verifiable in independent secondary reliable sources. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, nor is it a collection of unverifiable content. It is an encyclopedia that needs to be reliable. If sources do not exist, it is generally too soon for an article on that topic to be considered.
If an article is deemed TOOSOON, you may consider writing a draft. Please note that drafts can be automatically deleted after a period of inactivity, after which they may be requested for undeletion.
Verifiability
[edit]For an article to be created, its subject should be verifiably notable due to its discussion in sufficient independent secondary reliable sources. Sometimes, a topic may appear obviously notable to you, but there may not be enough independent coverage of it to confirm that. In such cases, it may simply be too soon to create the article.
This applies to recent events, people, new products and any other topics about which facts have only recently emerged or are still emerging. Even the rediscovery of old artefacts, such as archaeological finds or declassified documents, needs to be independently verified.
Biographies
[edit]Meeting the criteria
[edit]The meeting of any of the various criteria as set out in WP:N, WP:BIO, WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC, or WP:ENT must always be verifiable in reliable sources. (See WP:NRVE)
General notability guideline
[edit]Inclusion criteria might be met through an individual meeting the "general notability guideline" and their having significant coverage in "reliable sources" (not editorials, not Facebook, nor Twitter/X). It should be remembered that even in cases where a person might not meet the GNG, the GNG itself is not the final word. Editors are encouraged to also consider the topic-specific notability sub-criteria as set out in WP:Notability (people) (shortcuts: WP:BIO or WP:PEOPLE).
Notability for biographies
[edit]Biography notability basics
[edit]WP:BASIC acts to remind editors of the caveats at the general notability guideline, in its restating that an individual is presumed to be notable "if they have been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject", and expands that "if depth-of-coverage is not substantial, then multiple less-than-substantial independent sources may be needed to prove notability". It re-states that coverage "must be more than trivial and must be reliable".
WP:BASIC explains that primary sources may be used to support the content of an article, as they are not against the rules. However, and even when used, primary sources do not contribute toward notability and may only support other content.
WP:ANYBIO
[edit]WP:ANYBIO describes attributes that may be considered toward establishing notability... as long as the attributes are themselves supported by reliable sources in their allowing then the presumption that additional sources are likely to exist.
WP:ANYBIO allows that ANY individual may be presumed notable if
- "the person has received a notable award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times", OR
- "the person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field".
Meeting these "attributes" allows editors to accept a presumption in good faith that other sources are likely to exist without also demanding that these "other sources" be immediately found and offered. Remember... WP:ANYBIO allows for the reasonable presumption and makes no other demand.
Verify
[edit]Meeting any of the criteria set out in notability, general notability guideline, biography notability guideline, WP:ANYBIO, WP:BASIC, or entertainer notability guideline must always be verifiable in reliable sources, as most importantly, notability requires verifiable evidence.... and even though all of these criteria need not be met, they are not mutually exclusive.
Actors
[edit]An actor might merit an article in Wikipedia if they meet any of the various notability criteria as set out by guidelines at WP:Notability and/or the various applicable topic-specific notability sub-sections, as explained above. Actors are grouped in with Entertainers, as detailed in WP:NACTOR. The guidelines do not mandate that all or even that most of these criteria have to be met... but if an actor cannot meet at least one of them, it is pretty much too soon for an article to be considered.
A good example of this is Paris Jackson, as seen at this Articles for Deletion discussion from 2012: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paris Katherine Jackson. At the time of the discussion, she had been announced as the star of a film (Lundon's Bridge and the Three Keys) that would be released a year after – however, the film had not actually been released yet. Thus the article was deleted (redirected to her father's page). The article was reinstated in August 2013. As of 2024[update], the movie remains unreleased.
Another example is Raegan Revord. At the time of this writing, they had been part of a big mainstream TV series (Young Sheldon) for almost six years. Yet, Wikipedia did not have a Raegan Revord page as of November 2022[update] (the preceding link was red at that time). This is because while they easily meet the general guidelines, the article cannot establish significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. This is not because the draft is poorly written or researched. It is instead for the simple reason they hadn't had more than the one such role - there just isn't any second such role to find references for.
If an actor cannot meet at least one of the inclusion criteria, it is pretty much too soon for an article to be considered.
Entertainers
[edit]WP:ENTERTAINER expands on consideration of entertainment-specific criteria for actors who, even if failing the GNG, might still be reasonably presumed as notable if having
- 1 "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions", OR
- 3 "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment"[1]
Films
[edit]For upcoming films, WikiProject Film has notability guidelines outlined at Wikipedia:Notability (films) § Future films, incomplete films, and undistributed films. If a film cannot meet these guidelines, it would be too soon for a film to come out.
Per WP:N, upcoming films that are notable are those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, based on evidence from reliable and independent sources, otherwise it is too soon. Announcements from primary sources, like the companies involved with producing and distributing the film, should not be considered evidence for establishing notability. Only when secondary sources that are reliable and independent cover details about upcoming films should that coverage be considered evidence toward notability.
However, an upcoming film can be considered too soon if filming has not yet started, even if reliable sources have significantly covered the film's development. This is because before the start of filming, by industry standards, there is still uncertainty as to if a film will actually be produced. Once filming is underway, there is a strong likelihood of its completion and release. (There are rare exceptions of films ending mid-production, or films produced but never released, that need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.) Upcoming films covered before their release tend to have their roots in a broader notable context, like a notable director working on the film, the film being an adaptation of a notable book, and so forth. When it is too soon, with filming not yet underway, coverage about its development can be summarized in a section elsewhere.
Even when it is not too soon for an upcoming film to have a standalone article, great care must be taken to follow the policy WP:NOTPROMO, that information about the film "must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery". Writing about an upcoming film is not inherently promotional when it objectively summarizes details from reliable sources about the film.
Related essays
[edit]- Wikipedia:Usual caveats – an essay dealing with how a topic might become notable in the future, even if not quite yet.
- WP:HAMMER – an essay about unnamed albums
- Wikipedia:OEN – an essay that explains how to apply WP:Notability (film)'s "Other evidence of notability" section.
- Wikipedia:There is no deadline
- WP:NOPE – an essay on notability
- Wikipedia:Improve the junk – an essay on improving the improvable
- Wikipedia:GNGACTOR – an essay on actors and the general notability guide
- Wikipedia:PRIMER – an essay to help newcomers get a grip.
- Wikipedia:Up and coming next big thing – on up-and-coming next big things which may never up and come or be big things
- WP:Before they were notable – humorous list of articles that were created too soon
- Wikipedia:When in doubt, hide it in the woodwork
Footnotes
[edit]- ^ Number 2, 'Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following,' was deleted