User:Bearian/Standards

This is an essay. 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.

• 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.
• A frequent reason that an entry is unreferenced is because the creator wants to create an article about something or some place/someone they like, but the reviews of the book/film are devastating (see The Legend That Was Earth, for example) or the village is a Peyton Place, or the person has dirty laundry. It's their choice: reference it with the bad news, or it's going to be deleted. The world is a messy, grey place.
• I avoid, when possible, getting involved in deletion discussions nowadays that might be too controversial, such as professional sports, ethnic conflicts, and popular culture.

I have become worried, as of July 2024, that certain sources cited are not as reliable as they used to be. In particular, Who’s Who, Forbes, and the “Grey Lady” have made editorial decisions that make them less reliable than even four years ago. When a storied book is asking random secondary school teachers, or retired assistant professors and one-star generals to submit autobiographical information, it’s no longer reliable. When every time this past month I heard or read someone cite The Times as a breaking news source, I went instead to Wikipedia for verification. Their editorial decisions betray nowadays a bias that cannot be ignored. “Oh how the mighty have fallen!” I’ve been waiting for an appropriate AfD to state that truth, and a random debate in July 2024 was the kairos.

At another August 2024 AfD, I also noted that this is the appropriate time to add in a lesson on how college journalism has changed radically over the past few decades. Between the large university presses, more reliable blogs and content users, the sourcing is fine. The slavish adherence to mainstream media (MSM) as the *only* reliable sources is, as of 2024, badly broken. Part of the change has been the deterioration of MSM, which instead of direct advertising and subscriptions, has become chained to clicks on their online platforms. The other major change has been the consolidation of higher education and paid journalism at those universities. In the 1980s, when I published a college newspaper at SUNY New Paltz, every staff member was a volunteer and our audience was the 2,200 students living full-time in the Residence halls. College newspapers today have paid staff, and my Alma mater has 8,300 students. Content creators didn’t exist in 1991, but 200 of them were credentialed at the 2024 Democratic National Convention.

Like wise, the Times of India used to be a reliable source, but its standards have fallen.

I think the use of a single source, as I’ve mentioned at AfDs many times, amounts to WP:OR. That includes a single quote from scripture, unless additional evidence is provided.

English Wikipedia has a Policy on Notability of High Schools. Schools 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 least 7 of 10):

1. Has (or has had 50) or more students
2. Has (at least) 10th through 12th grades
3. Has been in existence for (at least) 10 academic years, with historic status if it's over 100 years old
4. Grants a diploma, GED, or an International Baccalaureate
5. Pays its teachers (who presumably have Bachelors' degrees or higher)
6. Is a Public school, or an Accredited Private school, or an Accredited Charter school,
7. Has 2 or more notable alumni, who already have their own articles
8. Has 3 or more reliable sources, as defined below (now 3 to align with WP:BLP),
9. Has 1 or more notable academic programs, major annual events, or scholastic sports.
10. 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.
• Public school district web site.
• A recognized accrediting body's web site.
• A sports web site.
• A scouting web site (such as Girl Scouts)
• 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.

• Social media accounts, RateMyTeacher, religious body and church websites, and the like, are not reliable.

• 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.

• 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.

I declare that a river is notable if it:

1. is verifably real
2. is at least 1 kilometer long
3. is filled with water at least 3 months of the year, or, in Australia, 3 months in 10 years.

I declare that a hamlet, borough, city, town, or village is per se notable, for English Wikipedia, if it:

1. is verifiably real and recognized legally' by at least one reliable source, with exceptions and particulars noted below, and
2. is in an English-speaking country, and
3. 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.
• Examples of very small, yet possibly notable, towns are Altamont, South Dakota, pop. 34, and Vermontville, New York, pop. unknown.
• See also
  • Wikipedia:Notability (populated places) (failed) 2
  • WP:GEOLAND

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:

1. is verifiably real by at least two reliable sources
2. is in an English-speaking country
3. has at least 4,000 persons living year-round, according a government census taken in the past 12 years.

Some examples of notable projects in NYC are Co-op City, Waterside Plaza, and Kips Bay Towers. Obviously, smaller housing projects or subdivisions are usually not notable, but may be merged into a larger article for a street or neighborhood, for example, Sedgewick_Avenue#1520_Sedgwick_Avenue.

• Incorporated towns, boroughs, abandoned towns, ghost towns, and incorporated villages in New York may have less than 12 persons residing therein and still be notable, for example, the so-called Rotten boroughs of England.
• Ghost towns can be notable if they meet all other requirements, such as being well-documented by reliable sources.

The vast majority of golf courses and country clubs are run of the mill. There are thousands of golf courses in North America and Japan. Wikipedia is not a directory of golf courses. We have lots of non-notable courses here on this website.

Signs this one is notable:

• There are multiple news sources and book sources published by well-known houses.
• Several major tournaments, championships, or charity events have been held here.
• Multiple notable persons, especially the rich, royalty, and aristocrats, have been members and/or played there over several years.
• The course is part of a national or state park, although a merge might be in order.
• The course or club was founded before 1900.
• The club or course is a stand-along property.
• It has 18 or more holes.

Signs this one is not notable:

• The only sources are specialty interest books/magazines.
• It had one or more notable golfers play there, but it was years ago and sourcing is sketchy.
• The roster of members and players are nouveau riche (example: Trump family, Elon Musk).
• One or no major charitable events have been held there.
• It is a municipal (city or county) park.
• The course or club was founded after 1960.
• The course or club is primarily an amenity to a housing development, resort, or hotel. In some cases, a redirect might be acceptable.
• It has 9 or fewer holes.

In my view, examples of non-notable places include:

• It is one of thousands of vacation resorts, holiday spots, golf courses, ranches, or country clubs.
• Housing estates, condominiums, trailer parks, neighborhoods, subdivisions, or projects, having fewer than 4,000 residents.
• No reliable sources can verify its existence.
• 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 900 Barangays 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.

A church (or temple, synagogue, abbey, convent, or mosque) building may 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 is a National Historic Site, e.g. St. Paul's Church National Historic Site, UNESCO World Heritage Site, or equivalent in the jurisdiction.
• It is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
• 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.

• For an example of an AfD with which I agree, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basilica of Sant'Ubaldo, Gubbio.
• 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.
• Churches older than 200 years are by precedent notable: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Olav's Church, Serampore.
• By these standards, Ram Mandir is unequivocally notable.

"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)
• nominated for an appellate bench, or Federal Court, but for some reason was not appointed or confirmed; note that this includes over a dozen of the former president’s nominees
• trying a notable case, which has its own article in Wikipedia
• being recognized as an expert in a specialized area of law (see Mark Zaid and John S. Lowe)
• specialized admission such as patent law or admiralty, or to a specialized court such as the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
• arguing one or more cases before the Supreme Court of the United States
• running for public office or managing a statewide campaign (but that alone is not sufficient)
• service as a law clerk at SCOTUS or having clerked for another famous judge

• service as a district attorney in a larger county (150,000 population or more), or United States Attorney
• 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)
• Queen's Counsel in Canada, the United Kingdom, etc.

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 an elected official at the local level is completely run of the mill, as there are 1/2 million officer-holders in the USA alone. See also Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Viviana_Parraguez.
• Many lawyers work in election law, often as election commissioners or inspectors, so that's nothing special.
• Many lawyers are agents for musicians and sports teams or players; it's nothing special.
• Compare keeps for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene Michael Hyman and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Elfving, with deletes for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrea Monti (lawyer), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Craig (judge), and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher du Pont Roosevelt. See also my delete opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Gordon (lawyer), and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Patrick_Knapp_Schwarzenegger. See furthermore Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene Patterson Harris where I emphasized that representing a notable defendant is only one factor towards notability.

• These factors could be used generally for a whole firm, with caution. It is important the notability for partnerships, LLCs or other law firms be documented with more than merely trivial mentions in multiple reliable sources. Boies, Schiller & Flexner is an example of a law firm where two or more of its former attorneys would be notable, as is the whole firm.
• 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.
• Examples of non-notable law firms include: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AM Law Firm.

• Local courts such town, village, borough, ward, police and similar courts are not notable.

• Examples of non-notable court include: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family Court, Rayagada.

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blastus, User:Ihcoyc, a/k/a Smerdis of Tlön, wrote:

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.

• I agree.

• I agree. I would also include anyone with the title of Grand mufti or Ayatollah in Islam, or Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

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.

• see Wikipedia:TenPoundHammer's Law
• see Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Albums

My standards here apply to consorts, children, and siblings of nobility and/or royalty:

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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 a 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.
5. A rare case for keep would be a member of the notability who has left their Estate to join the clergy; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Father Florian.
6. In certain rare cases, where it is borderline, a merge, for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Kanty Zamoyski.
7. 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.
8. Also there can be a very rare situation where deletion of a head of a former sovereign state is likely to be uncontested, because no reliable sources can be found and they have been too private. It should not be construed as a precedent. The only example of such proposed deletion that I’ve seen is Wilhelm Albert, Duke of Urach.

For a hospital to be notable, it must have at least 209 in-patient beds; this number is based on patient-centered care standards - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madonna Rehabilitation Hospital and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Abdali_Medical_Center_(2nd_nomination).

Hospital foundations are rarely notable - see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/University_Hospitals_Kingston_Foundation.

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:

1. At least three entries of notable buildings, which are freestanding and not a set of towers,
2. In a city of at least 75,000 inhabitants, or a notable holiday/vacation resort community
3. At least one of them would have to be at least 60 stories high, and
4. A stand-alone list makes sense (which is a lower standard than WP:NLIST).

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):

1. A Paper of record has had one or more articles about it.
2. Reviews in tour guides, newspapers, magazines, web sites, and glamour magazines. Not all of the reviews have to be substantial; some could be listings or part of a survey (top 10 hotels in X city), but at least two or three reviews in reliable sources must be about the particular hotel.
3. It is in a major city or resort town.
4. The architecture is notable or unusual, or was designed by an notable architect.
5. It is relatively tall (at least 12 stories) or large for its location (depending on the location, a minimum of 90-100 rooms).
6. 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).
7. 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).
8. Its location itself is notable: on a notable square, near a presidential palace, on a famous beach, or in other prime real estate.
9. Two or more notable events occurred there: a major charitable ball, film premiere, a famous affair (see List of federal political sex scandals in the United States and Oscar Wilde), death of a notable person, society wedding banquet, military/espionage/diplomatic conference, subject of an appellate decision, etc. (but a single such event isn't enough).
10. The building itself is historic, for example, Grade II* and Grade I (UK) or a National Historic Landmark.
11. The hotel is not part of a run-of-the-mill chain.

Note: It doesn't have to be a called a "hotel" - it could be a convent, pension, hostel, bed and breakfast, guest rooms, or motel.

Examples of recent keeps from me: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Radisson_Montevideo_Victoria_Plaza_Hotel, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hotel Rival

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.

Examples of recent deletes from me: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renaissance Kota Bharu Hotel, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hotel Palma Bellver, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hotel Best Western Park, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plaza Hotel, College Station, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Four Points by Sheraton Tripoli.

It appears that I have been in the minority as of early 2020. Even having 8 million followers does not convey notability. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denis (YouTuber). I have accepted Wikipedia:WikiProject YouTube/Notability as the go-to essay as if it were policy. However, the debates have not been consistent; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaun (YouTuber).

I think a person with over 700,000 followers on Twitter might be notable; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Porsha Williams.

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.

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.