It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community.
This page in a nutshell: There are some items that are very commonplace for which sources verifying their existence do exist. But there are so many of these that can be verified given the same sources, it would be better not to have a separate article on each and every one of them.
It is not practical or worthwhile to have an article on each of these identical-looking tract homes.
Something that is run-of-the-mill is a common, everyday, ordinary item that does not stand out from the rest. Something or someone that is "run-of-the-mill" is probably not notable, so it would be best not to create a separate, stand-alone article about it. Even if you limited yourself to subjects for which some reliable independent sources exist, there are just so many of these things in the world that if an article on each were to be created, there would be millions of articles on these boring subjects alone. Instead, consider finding a more interesting subject for your next article.
A street map shows every street within a city, down to every cul-de-sac with just four houses. Every city has several detailed street maps that have been published. In one square mile of an urban area, there are likely to be dozens of streets and there can be hundreds of square miles within a city and its suburbs. It is not practical to create an article on every street as the high volume might overwhelm the capacity of editors to maintain them. Almost every city has police and fire departments. These departments can be so busy that they are mentioned almost daily in the local news but again, they are just ordinary police and fire departments doing their jobs.
Although Wikipedia:Notability officially is not about importance or significance, and WP:ITSNOTIMPORTANT is one of the Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, editors supporting this essay believe there should be something unusual, something unique about the subjects of Wikipedia articles, so that the articles are not doomed to be very brief ("This house is the fourth house on 7th Street") and are not repetitive and boring ("Second verse, same as the first"). Once such an interesting subject has been established, the common sources (e.g. a map for a street) can then be used to verify the accuracy of information.
Examples of items or subjects
Some subjects in particular are extremely commonplace. This does not mean they are never notable. But it is surely not possible for all of them to qualify for a separate Wikipedia article.
Residential
Nearly every house is listed in some directory identifying the company that built it and the people who live in it. This does not make it worth creating an article about the house. There is a right to privacy when it comes to writing about a residence. Articles can be created on historic houses or homes where a famous person has lived, or homes that are notable for another reason (e.g., the home in Streisand effect or one famous for being the setting of a film). Apartment complexes, housing developments and trailer parks, even though there may be websites about each one and even though they are often displayed on maps, are not notable merely on this basis.
Commercial
This strip mall may be important to the nearby residents, and it is probably mentioned in a number of local newspapers and newsletters. But this doesn't necessarily make it notable in a way that could support an independent article, with coverage beyond a mere mention in the context of a broader topic.
Shopping centers, strip malls, office buildings, business or industrial parks or medical centers may have a lot of information from reliable sources giving them bare mention.
In every city and town there are single-location businesses (e.g. retail, restaurant, gas station, auto repair shop, motel) and in some places, most businesses fit this description. Yet they may be mentioned in reliable sources.
Sports
It has already been accepted that professional athletes, regardless of their accomplishments in their field, may receive coverage. Local newspapers also cover high school and college athletes, in every city and town, there are several high schools and colleges and papers that cover them; inevitably, these athletes will receive coverage.
In professional sports, each game will receive deep coverage from the local papers of the team's city and at minimum, a box score from papers elsewhere. Each professional sports league has plenty of teams (some have more than 30) and a sports season has many games (Major League Baseball has 162 per team per season). It is not practical to have an article on every game ever played. Imagine an article on "July 8 Cardinals vs. Brewers game" and "July 9 Cardinals vs. Brewers game" and "July 11 Cardinals vs. Cubs game" and so on. More encyclopedic would be articles like 2009 St. Louis Cardinals season, which describe the highlights of the season.
Political candidates
Every political candidate in every election, anywhere at all, can always show at least a few sources in the local media, such as an article about them announcing their candidacy, articles about the all-candidates debates, one or more "my positions on the issues" interviews and a results table that verifies their final vote total on election day. This does not mean that every political candidate should have their own standalone Wikipedia article based on such routine and run-of-the-mill coverage; rather, a candidate meets the notability criteria for having a Wikipedia article only if one or both of the following applies:
The person was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for other reasons as it is
A credible case can be made why the person's candidacy should be seen as considerably more noteworthy than everyone else's candidacies in some way that would pass the ten-year test for enduring significance
People
Many people have one or more obituaries published detailing the fact that they died, information regarding their deaths and often information about their families and lives. This information is published in a newspaper, a reliable source. But globally, about 180,000 people die each day, and thousands of them are memorialized either in journalistic obituaries or in paid memorial advertisements as well as in websites such as Legacy.com. Something written about a person when they die is usually run-of-the-mill.
What not to create
What to do when you have the common amount of reliable sources
A restaurant that has been reviewed in a national magazine
An article about the type of food (possibly with a section about restaurants that specialize in it)
An article about a large restaurant chain (instead of about individual locations or franchises)
A separate article about an individual restaurant if sources are much stronger than usual
A local club supporting a hobby or interest, or a local organization promoting some cause
A national club (instead of individual chapters)
An article about the hobby, interest, or cause itself (possibly with a section about related clubs)
A separate article about the local organization if sources are much stronger than usual
Regular-season games in a professional sport
An article or list of that season's games
An article about a post-season series of games
A separate article about an individual game only if sources are much stronger than usual
The local festival or other scheduled event that occurs annually
An article about the city or other location (possibly with a section about the festival or event)
A separate article about the local event only if sources are much stronger than usual
A local bank branch office that has been mentioned in the news each of the 5 times it has been robbed in its 30-year existence
An article about the bank as a whole
A separate article about the bank branch or the robberies only if sources are much stronger than usual
The side street where once every few years, a news-reported crime has occurred
An article about the city (possibly with a section about crime rates)
A separate article about the street only if sources are much stronger than usual
An ordinary political rally, candidacy for office, candidate announcement, or press conference
An article about the election as a whole (possibly with a section about the individual event)
An article about a notable candidate or politician
A separate article about the individual event only if sources are much stronger than usual
A lawyer who provides legal commentary for a local television or radio station
An article about the legal subject
A separate article about the legal expert only if sources are much stronger than usual
Dealing with a run-of-the-mill article
First, make sure the article is on a run-of-the-mill subject:
Does the written text seem to imply there is something unusual about the subject or something that may be encyclopedic? Just because something belongs to a category that might often be run-of-the-mill doesn't mean that this specific example is.
Examine the reference, sources and external links provided. Do they meet WP:RS guidelines? Do they come from international, national or local sources?
Is the topic one that is normally accepted by Wikipedia's guidelines?
If, after this review, you feel the article is, indeed, run-of-the-mill, you may take action.
Consider if any appropriate tags may be placed on top of the page in lieu of immediate deletion that may encourage others to improve the article.
If the topic of the article is a part of something larger, it may be merged or even blanked and redirected to that page or a list. This is especially useful for schools (to the local Town#Education section) and subjects that are clear sub-topics, e.g.:
authors and their books,
businesses and their products (or owners or CEOs),
cities and their recreational facilities (or schools or local people or agencies or infrastructure),
universities and their student clubs,
sports teams/seasons/events and their lesser-known athletes,
etc.
If something is truly not notable or is likely not to be considered notable, it may be nominated for deletion. This will give others a chance to discuss if it may be worth deleting the information. You may also start by using the {{prod}} tag to see if the deletion is challenged by someone else. Remember that WP:BORING is one of the Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Even if the subject feels boring to you, if it's possible to write a well-sourced article, it's still notable.
