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.
General notability notes
My basic rule for notability is WP:SIGCOV. A person or a concept referenced deeply by multiple, high-quality sources meets the basic standard of notability for Wikipedia.
I avoid, when possible, getting involved in deletion discussions nowadays that might be too controversial, such as professional sports, ethnic conflicts, and popular culture.
English Wikipedia does not have a Policy on Notability of High Schools, but they are kept when they are properly sourced. These are my own Standards.
A Public High School is notable, and thus will earn a keep vote from me at WP:AFD, regardless of anything else wrong with its article, according to these standards:
A notable High School is defined by these required factors (meeting at least7 of 10):
Has (or has had 50) or more students
Has (at least) 10th through 12th grades
Has been in existence for (at least) 10 academic years, with historic status if it's over 100 years old
Grants a diploma, GED, or an International Baccalaureate
Pays its teachers (who presumably have Bachelors' degrees or higher)
Is a Public school, or an Accredited Private school, or an Accredited Charter school
Has 2 or more notable alumni, who already have their own articles
Has 2 or more reliable sources, as defined below
Has 1 or more notable academic programs, major annual events, or scholastic sports.
Is located in a country large enough to have significant media presence online (in order to verify its existence, and has competitive sports and other teams that garner media exposure).
New high schools, elementary schools, middle schools, junior high schools, intermediate schools, "experimental" charter schools that open and close rapidly, those Yeshivas or Madrassas that do not grant diplomas, Proprietary colleges that offer GEDs, EOP's, EOC's, BOCES, and the like are not inherently notable, in my humble opinion.
Reliable sources for High Schools are one or more of these:
Daily newspaper articles on line, or a Magazine article.
For a non-public school, evidence must be cited and referenced that a school meets the above criteria. Those references must come from reliable independent sources other than the school or sponsoring entity, and meet normal Wikipedia standards for reliable sources.
Notes and links to other, notable Wikipedia articles (although those by themselves are not acceptable).
Social media ccounts, RateMyTeacher, religious body and church websites, and the like, are not reliable.
Notability of Streets
I agree with the standards enunciated by User:Grutness at WP:50k. Specifically: "Notable streets and roads can be divided into two types: those which are inherently notable due to some specific historical, geographical, or other quirk, and those which are notable simply by way of their prominence within a city or town." Also, "The "50,000 people per street" rule of thumb [is] ... For every 50,000 people in a city or town, there is probably one road or street prominent enough for a Wikipedia article."
1. Inherently notable streets have:
a subway, El, streetcar, or bus lines that runs down it (the more frequent the service, or more routes, the greater the tendency towards notability)
a center of a well-known industry or neighborhood(s)
historical buildings facing or having addresses on that street
a book, or major article, has been written about this street (a single passing mention is probably not enough, but if noted or used frequently in multiple books, then it is likely to be notable)
a notable person has ever lived on this street
a WikiProject to list every named street in X notable neighborhood.
2. Business districts, very long avenues, or streets dividing "slums" from "fashionable districts" are "notable simply by way of their prominence within a city or town." From WP:50k.
Obviously, with very important cities, such as Manhattan and London, the ratio is probably more like 1 street per 20,000 persons.
Notability of Mayors
Mayors of cities, towns, boroughs, and counties of more than 75,000 inhabitants, sourced according to a government census, are potentially notable, and I'd lean towards keeping. After the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James M. Cahill, I raised my threshold from 50,000 inhabitants to 75,000.
On the other hand, I presume that Mayors, deputy mayors, police commissioners, etc., for communities of fewer than 75,000 inhabitants are not notable because they are run of the mill.
Notability of Rivers
I declare that a river is notable if it:
is verifably real
is at least 1 kilometer long
is filled with water at least 3 months of the year, or, in Australia, 3 months in 10 years.
is verifiably realand recognized legally' by at least one reliable source, with exceptions and particulars noted below, and
is in an English-speaking country, and
has at least 12 persons living year-round, according a government census taken in the past 12 years.
A hamlet or village outside of English-speaking countries may be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but must be verifiable and have at least one reliable source in French, Latin, Italian, or Spanish, so that I can read it.
In a large city, city as London, England, New York City, or Manila, thousands of people may live in a single project. I declare that an estate or housing project is per se notable, for English Wikipedia, if it:
The Federal, state, or local government doesn't recognize it.
It is a collection of abandoned buildings that are part of a larger city, estate, or neighborhood.
Red flags of non-notability pop up: the exact location is not given, the title is written in small letters, it contains first person pronouns, or it can not be found in a reliable source.
Newly-created micronations are not real nor legal.
Most of the almost 900Barangays in Manila; many are only a few square blocks and lack even a name (e.g. Bgy. 483A).
A reliable source confirms this is "not a census designated or incorporated place having an official federally recognized name."
Railroad switches and whistle-stops.
An intersection, junction, or road crossing.
Notability of historic churches
A church (or temple, synagogue, abbey, convent, or mosque) buildingmay be notable if it has three or more of these factors:
The building is more than 100 years old (pre-1921). If more than 200 years old, this might be the deciding factor.
It was designed by a notable architect, and/or is notable for its architecture.
It has had two or more notable congregants.
It is notable for its church organ, choir, bells, or its music programme.
It has been notably large for its denomination, either in the size of the buildings or its congregation numbers.
It is the site of a major annual liturgical commemoration, or originator of a holy person's feast, or has been a major place of pilgrimage, beyond merely local or congregational interest.
It is a cathedral or basilica in the Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, or similarly large denomination; or the seat of a chief rabbi.
A major synod, or historically significant election of a bishop, was held therein.
A saint, or other notable holy person, worshipped or preached therein.
A significant icon, relic, or other holy item has been housed therein.
It has been the subject of an appellate opinion, or a master's thesis or doctoral dissertation.
It has been the site of a notable wedding, funeral, or memorial service.
It is a mosque unique for its geographical area.
It has been the target of sectarian or religious violence, riots, or war.
Listing in a reliable and well-known travel guide or an architecture textbook may be evidence of one or two factors as noted above.
For churches lacking traditional factors, or those that are iconoclastic, the age and architectural style of the building would be more heavily weighted factors.
"Lawyers are notable for what they do, what service they perform for the bar, for their academic expertise, and what the rights - not just the money - they win for other people." - Me.
To be a notable attorney, a person must have notable accomplishments as an attorney, backed up by references that are reliable. These accomplishments include:
a leading editor (managing editor, editor-in-chief, executive editor, president) of a law review or journal at an accredited law school
admission to an American law school honorary society known as 'Inns of Court' (but not to the English Inns of Court, to which all such lawyers belong)
winning and/or judging in a regional or national moot court competition
service on a major bar association committee or section (for example, chair of the young lawyers division or section, chair of a state bar -- see Steven C. Krane -- or ABA Board of Governors)
teaching at an accredited college or law school, as a chairman or tenured associate or full professor (preferably a distinguished professor per WP:PROF)
service as a legislator at any level of government, from county to Federal
service as a mayor in a city, village, or borough (75,000 population or more)
service as chair of a major civic committee in a major city or state (300,000 population or more) (for example, a Big City Centennial committee)
service on one or more statewide committees, commissions, or boards (for examples, an investigative commission, constitutional convention, public integrity commission, major state party, or state parole board), especially as a chairperson
service as a judge in an appellate court, or a Federal court, or major state trial court, such as New York Supreme Court
service in an administrative capacity in a major court system agency (example, clerk of a Federal court, chief court administrator)
service as an ambassador, especially as a political appointee (such as Frederic Jesup Stimson)
service as a general counsel of a large state or federal agency (example, secretary of state or transportation authority)
Having one or two of the factors noted above is not enough, but three or four are probably sufficient. Having three factors would be borderline.
Local trial courts (such as city, town, village, county, family, orphan's and widow's, surrogate's, probate, borough, and Superior Courts) do not count in my mind for notability, so judges at those courts are not notable enough.
Local boards, such as county or city planning, zoning, school, elections, and assessment appeals, are not notable enough; unless their status or situation provides them with national notoriety (such as Lewis F. Powell, Jr. when he was board president of the Richmond Public Schools).
A lawyer is supposed to argue appellate cases; that by itself is not enough.
A lawyer is supposed to try cases; that by itself is not enough.
A lawyer often is hired to lobby, either for profit or to volunteer on behalf of a cause; that by itself is not enough.
A lawyer is supposed to perform pro bono publico, such as free political, electoral, or criminal defense work; that by itself is not enough.
If there is no bar exam, law journal, or court admission for whatever area of law, then there is no such "specialty".
Service on the ABA or a state House of delegates is not notable enough.
Admission to the Supreme Court of the United States is not notable enough; almost every lawyer I know who's done it - no offense counselors - has done it for the ego trip or to impress their clients and spouses.
Campaigning for public office, or managing a congressional campaign or office, by itself, is not sufficient for notability!
Service on a political party county or state committee, by itself, is not notable, because many attorneys use such service as a marketing tool or résumé filler.
"Superlawyer" lists merely indicate notoriety; that by itself is not enough.
Service as a deputy or assistant district attorney, assistant county attorney, legal aid lawyer, citizen's action officer, law clerk in the attorney general's office, city attorney, assistant general counsel of a state or federal agency, or the like, is run of the mill - a very large number of lawyers have such experience.
Being one of the largest U.S. law firms by number of lawyers is a helpful factor.
A firm that has been continuously in practice for over a century, such as Rawle & Henderson LLP, would be usually be notable, but that alone is not the consensus.
Keep. A handy rule of thumb is this: people who lived before the Gutenberg era are notable if their names were written down in a text that's been preserved.
As a general rule, penultimate and ultimate works of major composers are probably epitomes of their work, and written when they were already famous, so their last work or two are likely to be notable.
My standards here apply to consorts, children, and siblings of nobility and/or royalty:
Royalty are almost always notable, even their spouses, children, and grandchildren (queens, princes, and princesses). In many cases, the consensus has been to redirect the princess to her husband's article. First Ladies are always notable. The parents of a President of the United States are almost always notable. As a general rule, I'd go with a keep for them.
Princesses and duchesses should be considered on a case-by-case basis, based on their relative rarity. There are only a dozen princes of the United Kingdom, and about 27 dukes existed in England for many years. They are not run of the mill. So individual articles on princesses and duchesses will not overrun the Project. Likewise, spouses and immediate relations of Hochadel (High Nobility) or fürstlich (royal, princely and ducal) houses would also be notable and should be a keep. Spouses and minor children of deposed royalty could be notable, because their businesses, charity work, attendance at relatives' notable weddings, or a notable scandal often provides them with media attention. One way to prove their notability would be if the consort or minor child were listed in the first section (list of sovereigns) in the Almanach de Gotha, or are of an old house such as a Uradel, which would have reliable sources. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simeon von Habsburg for an example of a delete.
Spouses of earls, marquesses, barons, counts, baronets, and the like (countesses, marquessas/marchionesses, baronesses, ladies, Hon. Mrs., etc.), are rarely notable in their own right, and they do not automatically inherit notability from their spouses, so would go with a delete for them. Likewise, spouses of freiherrlich (baronial), gräflich (comital), Landgrave, etc. in German/HRE nobility would probably be deleted. However, if their charitable or other work gains them notice, or if they are included in some group biography, then they might be considered notable enough for their own articles, and I would go with a weak keep in such cases.
There are two ways nobility or royalty can become notable in the 21st century: (a) being involved in major scandals and/or (b) being the patrons of notable philanthropies. Having one's picture taken with some people of ill repute is not enough, nor is a one-time socialite dinner. Examples of major scandals would be an sexual affair or financial corruption that gets significant coverage. Examples of patronage of charities would have to show the person is a guest of honor, or has made a significant donation of art or the equivalent of millions of dollars of donations, preferably over a number of years. So the proverbial Duchess in Hanover who divorced her husband after he was found in the arms of another woman, and her 20-year patronage of the Museum of Modern Art would be notable, but a Princess who had only passing coverage would not be. Again, if the only sources are about attending weddings, christenings, and funerals, a redirect to her husband's article might be best. A Spanish Princess who is the cousin of the King is not really notable just for attending family events; redirect her article to her more famous relation.
In very rare cases, the widow(er) of a famous person, who helped to create and shape the deceased's legacy, can be notable themselves; see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lily_Klee.
For a skyscraper to be inherently notable, it must be at least 60 stories high and notably tall for the city or resort community in which it stands. An older building that is at least 55 years old, and was the tallest in its area, might be considered notable.
A "List of tallest buildings" in X city would have to have:
At least three entries of notable buildings
In a city of at least 75,000 inhabitants, or a notable holiday/vacation resort community
At least one of them would have to be at least 60 stories high, and
A stand-alone list makes sense (which is a lower standard than WP:NLIST).
Notability of hotels
Notable hotels are often, but not always, skyscrapers. A hotel does not have to be a skyscraper to be notable. Nonetheless, I would look for the following (probably at least five of the following factors):
The architecture is notable or unusual, or was designed by an notable architect.
It is relatively tall (at least 12 stories) or large for its location (depending on the location, a minimum of 90-100 rooms).
It has a well-known bar, large conference facilities, and other hospitality amenities (beach, pool, tennis courts, etc.). Almost all hotels have some meetings; it would have to be substantial (a national conference) or unusual (a science fiction conference in the desert).
It is relatively old for the city or resort (for example, the first boutique hotel in the city, or a hotel over 200 years old).
Its location itself is notable: on a notable square, near a presidential palace, on a famous beach, or in other prime real estate.
Hotels that are low-to-middle (1-to 2-star hotels) are not automatically notable. The problem is that many are just franchisees, and thus there is little day-to-day control by the actual brand. Expensive does not equate to class nor notability. I would not use "sponsored content" to show notability of a hotel. Examples of such chains are Ramada, Hilton, Crowne Plaza, Trump, Scion, and Best Western.
I strongly support the November 1, 20022 version of Wikipedia:Notability (cryptocurrencies). If, outside of articles in the insular trade websites and insider newsletters, there's been a single news article about a crypto thing, then it's not notable.
Notability of public attractions
I support the January 8, 2023 version of Wikipedia:It's_a_castle!. Major ("starred") attractions should be listed both in Wikivoyage and here at Wikipedia.
