Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes

There have been many Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (AfD) debates over the years. This page summarizes how various types of articles, subjects, and issues have often been dealt with on AfD.

For an archive of this page, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Precedents/Archive.

Citing this page in AfD

This page summarizes what some editors believe are the typical outcomes of past AfD discussions for some commonly nominated subjects.

This page is not a policy or guideline, and previous outcomes do not bind future ones. The community's actual notability guidelines are listed in the template at the right. Notability always requires verifiable evidence, and all articles on all subjects are kept or deleted on the basis of sources showing their notability, not their subjective importance or relationship to something else. All articles should be evaluated individually on their merits and their ability to conform to standard content policies such as Verifiability and Neutral point of view.

As guidelines and actual practice change, this page should be updated to reflect current outcomes.

Avoid over-reliance on citing these "common outcomes" when stating one's case at Articles for Deletion. While precedents can be useful in helping to resolve notability challenges, editors are not necessarily bound to follow past practice. When push comes to shove, notability is demonstrated by the mustering of evidence that an article topic is the subject of multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in trustworthy independent sources.

This page simply attempts to summarize Wikipedia's common daily practice with respect to deletion debates. If you feel that an outcome common to articles like the one you are discussing does not apply, then give a common-sense or guidelines-based reason why it shouldn't apply. Avoid weak or illogical arguments, such as "Notability is only an optional guideline" or "We always keep these articles".

You can use the template {{Outcomes}} to link to this section.

General notability guideline

A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. However, there is still a lot of debate on notability.

Companies and organizations

Businesses

Religious organizations

Computing

Education

School districts

Schools

  1. Most elementary (primary) and middle schools that don't source a clear claim to notability usually get merged or redirected to the school district authority that operates them (generally the case in North America) or the lowest level locality (elsewhere or where there is no governing body).
  2. Most independently accredited degree-awarding institutions have enough coverage to be notable, although that coverage may not be readily available online.
  3. Before 2017, secondary schools were assumed notable unless sources could not be found to prove existence, but following a February 2017 RFC, secondary schools are not presumed to be notable simply because they exist, and are still subject both to the standards of notability, as well as those for organizations.

People

Events

Broadcast media

The general notability guideline is the guideline of import for determining the notability of broadcast media outlets, per a 2021 RfC.

Television programs

Fiction

Geography and astronomy

Populated places

Lists

Literature

Music

People

Academics

Businesspeople and executives

Celebrities

Clergy and religious persons

Competitors

Early settlers and colonists

Oldest people

Politicians

In general

  • Elected and appointed political figures at the national cabinet level are generally regarded as notable, as are usually those at the major sub-national level (US state, Canadian province, etc.) in countries where executive and/or legislative power is devolved to bodies at that level. See WP:POLITICIAN and WP:NSUBPOL.
  • Engaging in educational activities such as student councils, youth parliaments, Model United Nations, etc. does not by itself confer any notability.

Local politicians

  • In general: Municipal and other local politicians are not presumptively notable just for being in politics, but neither are they presumptively non-notable just because they are in local politics. Each case is evaluated on its own individual merits.
  • Mayors: Mayors of cities of at least regional prominence have usually survived AFD, although the article should say more than just "Jane Doe is the mayor of Cityville". Mayors of smaller towns, however, are generally deemed not notable just for being mayors, although they may be notable for other reasons in addition to their mayoralty (e.g. having previously held a more notable office). This criterion has not generally been as restrictive as the criterion for city councillors.
  • Municipal officers: City councillors and other major municipal officers are not automatically notable. But precedent has tended to favor keeping members of the main citywide government of internationally famous metropolitan areas such as Toronto, Chicago, Tokyo, or London.
  • Local candidates: Losing candidates in municipal elections are not considered presumptively notable just for their candidacy and are generally deleted unless previous notability can be demonstrated. See also more on candidates below.
  • County legislators: Like municipal politicians, American county-level legislators are not considered presumptively notable.
  • Exceptions for non-local media coverage: Local politicians whose office would not ordinarily be considered notable may still clear the bar if they have received national or international press coverage, beyond the scope of what would ordinarily be expected for their role. For example, a small-town mayor or city councillor who was the first LGBT person ever elected to office in their country, or who emerged as a significant national spokesperson for a political issue, may be considered notable on that basis. Note that this distinction may not simply be asserted or sourced to exclusively local media; to claim notability on this basis, the coverage must be shown to have nationalized or internationalized well beyond their own local area alone.

Candidates

  • Candidates who are running or unsuccessfully ran for a national legislature or other national office are not viewed as having presumptive notability and are often deleted or merged into lists of campaign hopefuls, such as Ontario New Democratic Party candidates in the 1995 Ontario provincial election, or into articles detailing the specific race in question, such as 2010 United States Senate election in Nevada. Note that such articles are still subject to the same content policies as any other article, and may not contain any unsourced biographical information that would not be acceptable in a separate article.
  • Losing candidates for office below the national level who are otherwise non-notable are generally deleted. They are not moved to user space or draftspace for fear of establishing a precedent that any premature article about an as-yet-unelected candidate for office can be kept in draftspace pending election returns, effectively making draftspace a repository for campaign brochures (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siân Gwenllian.)

Political figures not elected to public office

  • Sub-cabinet officials (assistant secretary, commissioner, etc.) are usually considered notable, especially if they have had otherwise notable careers.
  • The spouse of the head of state or government is usually regarded as notable.
  • Leaders of registered political parties at the national level are sometimes considered notable despite their party's lack of electoral success. Leaders of major sub-national (state, province, prefecture, etc.) parties are usually deleted unless notability can be demonstrated for other reasons.
  • Ambassadors are not considered presumptively notable.
  • Civil servants who assume a political office on an interim or caretaker basis are not considered notable just for having briefly held that office, even if holders of the office are normally considered notable.

Monarchs and nobility

There are no special notability guidelines about monarchs, nobility and their descendants. The guidelines for politicians are applied to those who have exercised political authority. As such, kings and queens regnant, as well as nobles who have ruled a territory or served as head of state are presumed to be notable. The notability of their spouses (kings and queens consort), as well as other nobility (dukes, counts, barons, knights, etc.) is decided on a case-by-case basis based on the general notability guideline, although kings and queens consort are generally found to be notable.

The descendants of monarchs or nobles, especially deposed ones, are not considered notable for this reason alone. The principle that Wikipedia articles are not genealogical entries is often mentioned in this context. But persons who are active in their capacity as a member of a royal house or as a holder of a title of nobility will often receive media coverage for it, which may help establish their notability according to the general notability guideline.

Species

Transportation

Aviation

Buses

Rail transport

Roads

Ships

See also