Ikwipedia:Notability: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 10:56, 20 November 2024

For a topic to have an article, it must be both notable and have acceptable sources that can be cited to support the descriptions of it. As in Wikipedia, if there are no acceptable sources for a subject, it is not sufficiently notable and there should not be an article on it.

Inherent notability of hypothesis-adjacent topics

Certain topics are so paradigm-shifting that they are inherently notable, even if they have insufficient reliable-source coverage to have a Wikipedia page. Such topics include:

Paranormal phenomena: people, places, events, things, entities, and concepts; evidence of the existence of non-human intelligent beings, etc.

Speculative concepts: exotic technologies, people, places, events, things, entities, etc. not proven to exist

Major wrongdoing of public concern: conspiracy theories based on testimonial accounts; alleged systemic deceptions; etc.

A mere (testimonial) claim alluding to the existence or validity of one or more of these topics warrants documentation of the topic(s), regardless of whether it can be verified by a particular standard of evidence. Documenting these topics in an encyclopedic way synthesizes the available information about them and shows how they interrelate, which helps to provide a more clear understanding of a coherent framework that accounts for them all, if such a framework exists.

Limitations

This permissive notability standard does not necessarily extend to all topics. Content which would not be found in a comparable Wikipedia article — even on an otherwise-notable subject and supported by otherwise-reliable sources, such as claims that primarily concern public figures' private lives — and which is not paradigm-shifting in the sense described is most likely not notable unless it specifically relates to inherently notable topics.

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 :'''Major wrongdoing of public concern:''' [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy theories]] based on [[Ikwipedia:Testimonial accounts|testimonial accounts]]; alleged [[systemic-deception theory|systemic deception]]s; etc.
-A mere claim alluding to the existence or validity of these topics warrants documentation of the topic of the claim, regardless of whether it can be verified by a particular standard of evidence. Documenting these topics in an encyclopedic way synthesizes the available claims about them and shows how they interrelate, which helps to provide a more clear understanding of a [[Ikwipedia:Hypothesis of Ikwipedia|coherent framework that accounts for them all, if such a framework exists]].
+A mere ([[Ikwipedia: testimonial accounts|testimonial]]) claim alluding to the existence or validity of one or more of these topics warrants documentation of the topic(s), regardless of whether it can be verified by a particular standard of evidence. Documenting these topics in an encyclopedic way synthesizes the available information about them and shows how they interrelate, which helps to provide a more clear understanding of a [[Ikwipedia:Hypothesis of Ikwipedia|coherent framework that accounts for them all, if such a framework exists]].
 ==Limitations==
 This permissive notability standard does not necessarily extend to all topics. Content which would not be found in a comparable Wikipedia article — even on an otherwise-notable subject and supported by otherwise-reliable sources, such as claims that primarily concern public figures' private lives — and which is not paradigm-shifting in the sense described is most likely not notable unless it specifically relates to inherently notable topics.