Revision as of 02:29, 23 August 2023 edit InedibleHulk (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 127,642 edits m →Primary sources should be used carefully: ...AND carefully. ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:29, 23 August 2023 edit undo InedibleHulk (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 127,642 edits m →Secondary sources for notability: There are no however topics. Next edit →
Line 115: ==Secondary sources for notability== Just because topics are covered in primary sources does not mean that they are notable. Information about an author from the book jacket copy of the author's own book does not demonstrate notability, for example. Secondary sources are needed to establish notability for the purposes of deciding which articles to keep. ~~However topics~~Topics that are only covered briefly or in poor quality secondary sources may not meet the [[WP:GNG\|general notability guideline]]. AFDs (articles for deletion) require showing that topics meet [[WP:GNG\|the general notability guideline's]] requirement that secondary sources exist. It is difficult, if not impossible, to find secondary sources for [[WP:MILL\|run-of-the-mill events]] and [[breaking news]]. Once a couple of years have passed, if no true secondary sources can be found, the article is usually deleted.

Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources: Difference between revisions