|
Sesebuah '''topik''' ''dianggap'' sebagai terkemuka jika ia menerima liputan meluas dalam [[Wikipedia:Nyatakan sumber rujukan|sumber rujukan yang meyakinkan]] dan [[Wikipedia:Pengesahan#Sumber|bebas]] dari subjek itu.
* ''"Dianggap"'' bererti bukti objektif memenuhi kriteria, tanpa mengambil kira pertimbangan peribadi subjektif penyunting.<ref>Tidak dikenali (''Non-notability'') adalah angapan bantahan (''rebuttable presumption'') berasaskan kekurangan bukti dikenali, yang menjadi tidak bernilai apabila bukti dijumpai. Ia tidak mungkin membuktikan tidak-penting kerana ia memerlukan bukti negetif.</ref> Banyak litupan dalam [[WPWikipedia:RSNyatakan sumber rujukan|sumber dipercauaidipercayai]] membuktikan bahawa subjek adalah penting.<ref>Bagaimanapun, banyak subjek yang dianggap penting ''mungkin masih'' tidak perlu dimasukkan – ia gagal [[Wikipedia:Apa yang bukan Wikipedia|apa What Wikipedia is not]], or the coverage does not actually support notability when examined. For example, directories and databases, advertisements, announcements columns, minor news stories, and coverage with low levels of discrimination, are all examples of information that may not be evidence of notability for the purposes of article creation, despite their existence as [[WP:RS|reliable sources]].</ref>
* ''"SignificantLiputan coveragemeluas"'' meansbererti thatsumber sourcesmenerangkan addresssubjek thesecara subjectlangsung directlydan in detailterperinci, and [[Wikipedia:NoTiada originalpenyelidikan researchasli|notanpa originalsebarang researchpenyelidikan asli]] isyang neededdiperlukan tountuk extractmengekstrak the contentkandungannya. Significant coverage isLiputan moremeluas thantidak trivialboleh butremeh-temeh maydan betidak lesswajar thanberbentuk exclusiveeksklusif.<ref>Examples: The 360-page book by Sobel and the 528-page book by Black on [[IBM]] are plainly non-trivial. The one sentence mention by Walker of the band ''Three Blind Mice'' in a biography of [[Bill Clinton]] ({{cite news|title=Tough love child of Kennedy|author=Martin Walker|date=[[1992-01-06]]|work=[[The Guardian]]|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1240962,00.html}}) is plainly trivial.</ref>
* ''"ReliableMeyakinkan"'' meansbererti sourcessumber memerlukan needintegriti editorial integrityyang tomembolehkan allowpenilaian kepentingan yang [[Wikipedia:VerifiabilityPengesahan|verifiableboleh disahkan]] evaluation of notability, perberlandaskan [[Wikipedia:ReliableNyatakan sourcessumber rujukan|thegaris reliablepanduan sourcesumber yang guidelinemeyakinkan]]. Sources may encompass [[Publication|published]] works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject are a good test for notability.<ref>Self-promotion, autobiography, and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article. The published works should be ''someone else'' writing independently about the topic. (See [[Wikipedia:Autobiography]] for the attribution and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material. Also see [[Wikipedia:Independent sources]].) The barometer of notability is whether people ''independent'' of the topic itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the topic notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it. </ref>
* ''"Sources,"''<ref>Including but not limited to newspapers, books and e-books, magazines, television and radio documentaries, reports by government agencies, scientific journals, etc. In the absence of multiple sources, it must be possible to verify that the source reflects a neutral point of view, is credible and provides sufficient detail for a comprehensive article.</ref> defined on Wikipedia as [[Wikipedia:No original research#Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources|secondary sources]], provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.<ref>Lack of multiple sources suggests that the topic may be more suitable for inclusion in an article on a broader topic. Mere republications of a single source or news wire service do not always constitute multiple works. Several journals simultaneously publishing articles in the same geographic region about an occurrence, does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information. Specifically, several journals publishing the same article within the same geographic region from a news wire service is not a multiplicity of works.</ref>
* ''"Independent of the subject"'' excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, [[WP:SPS|self-published]] material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.<ref>Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large. See also: [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]] for handling of such situations.</ref>
|
