Forum:Establishing notability

We've already determined that not everything in Call of Duty needs to be covered, which resulted in the retirement of our granularity policy. So now the next step is to establish what is/isn't notable and what does/doesn't deserves an article.

Things get difficult here, because no matter how you slice it, articles will have to go as a result of a new notability policy. We simply cannot "save" every article. However, such a policy will keep the scope of our wiki unambiguous.

Let's start with what we have already. The character policy has a brief section on notability. The first point allows obvious storyline characters to have an article (such as Gaz or James Ramirez). The second is a little more debatable, as it states that mentioned characters may have an article. Right off the bat, there's inconsistency here. Valentina recently had a successful AfD nomination on the point of being "not notable," yet was created on the same basis that an article such as Jack was. Previously, we even had articles on characters with inconsistent names that preformed scripted events (i.e. British door opener in The End of the Beginning in Call of Duty 2). So where is the line drawn here? If we cover all mentioned characters, we would have to extend Valentina to the Russian sniper's mother, his father, his sister and his dog, yet not even have an article on the man himself.

To say a little more on character's notability, I was told in a suggestion for notability that characters deserve an article if they do something "important." But what does important mean? If MacTavish sat down with other characters for a cup of tea in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, would everyone at that table be "important"? What if in the campaign for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the second most "important" character to the storyline had an inconsistent name? Is he no longer "important"?

I feel that weapons, perks, maps, missions are a given and can be covered regardless, but you are welcome to debate that.

Objects, places, and other miscellanea in the world are another component that was stated as an issue of COD:G. I'm curious as to what makes North Africa notable, other than the fact that it "appears in Call of Duty 2" which is really bad logic. If you see an U.S. Army Ranger looking at his phone, does that automatically make cellular phones notable? If Shepherd displays a picture of The Pentagon, is it suddenly now notable? It is true that Quick Scoping is a popular tactic, but does that mean it gets its own article?

Points for discussion:
 * Which characters are notable, and why? (Example: Mentioned characters, scripted event characters with inconsistent names)
 * What places are notable, and why? (Example: Virginia, Italy)
 * What other misc. are notable, and why? (Example: Nuclear Emergency Search Team, No Scoping)
 * Is there a blanket rule to notability? Why or why not?

With this discussion, we will hopefully be able to develop a new policy to keep the scope of the wiki focused. 13:45, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
As always, Bovell has another great idea. 13:48, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Well said, my friend. However, I think we should have a page for the creation of pages, much like the page for deleting them. Users can vote, and after all the pointless articles are weeded out, then we won't have this problem anymore. Ya? Shotrocket6 13:51, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not to take credit away from Bovell for his write-up, but many of the exact points raised were brought up by others in previous COD:G discussions. This is a natural follow-up to the discussions that a few have worked hard on up until now. I will post a thorough comment in the near future. However, I'd like to re-examine the MacTavish tea party scenario in a different light. MacTavish is established as an important character. What makes the hypothetical party interesting to analyse is whether the other soldiers having team with MacTavish become notable. --Scottie theNerd 14:32, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

If we are to have pages on scripted even characters with inconsistent names, how would we name the articles? Mentioned characters should get their own article, but then we get the dilemma with Hitler and Rommel etc. again. In my option, there is no problem in that really. NEST should have its own article, because it is explicitly mentioned, and they are mentioned doing a definite action. No Scoping can have its own article, because it is a widely used tactic, and I don't see how having an article on it would be a bad thing. Notable places should be places the games take place in. I don't really feel there is a blanket rule of notability, because notability guidelines for characters, places, and other things would differ from each other. --Callofduty4 (Talk) 14:29, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

Notable parts that should be covered:
 * Characters: playable (ex. Dimitri Petrenko), unplayable major characters (Reznov), characters with same name and same special action every map spawn (Ryan).
 * Factions: playable (CIA), playable in multiplayer (Navy SEALs), allies (Loyalists), enemies (OpFor).
 * Countries: origins of allies or enemies (United States of America), battlefields (Netherlands).
 * Locations: should be covered on pages with missions on it (Crew Expendable).
 * Weapons and vehicles: usable weapons and vehicles (M1911), allies and enemy weapons and vehicles (Flakvierling).
 * Items: usable (Medical Kits), allies and enemy items (DSM).

Hitler should not be covered because he metioned only 1 time in game (as far as I know), when player rides on tank in Call of Duty, sometimes phrases "You will heil Hitler in hell!" can be heard. 16:47, August 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * In Call of Duty: Finest Hour, Viktor Durasov describes the Wehrmacht as "Hitler's brutalized hordes"; in Call of Duty 2, American soldiers will yell "Hitler doesn't give a rat's ass about you" to German troops during battle; in Call of Duty 2: Big Red One it is stated that Denley joined the Army with the intention of "tearin' off Hitler's mustache and shoving it up his..."; and in Call of Duty: World at War Markhov refers to him as "the Fuhrer". 21:53, August 25, 2010 (UTC)

I think it might be a good idea to consider which articles should be merged into bigger articles. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but if we're getting rid of pages such as "Cuba", instead of deleting it, we could compile it into a section on the BO article entitled "Locations". The same would go for articles such as Russia on the MW2 article. --   8 ight   0 h   8 ight  03:25, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

For me, the criteria is as follows: That's my opinion, feel free to discuss changes you want me to make. Hk37 Need help? Contact me here! 03:49, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Characters: PCs (i.e. James Ramirez, Paul Jackson), characters with unlimited Plot Armor (i.e. invincible throughout entire game, unless death is scripted) (i.e. Sgt. Foley, Gaz), and characters whose names never change 'and' serve a purpose in game (i.e. West, Scully) should be included.
 * Factions: If a faction is playable in single 'or' multiplayer, they should be included (i.e. Task Force 141, Militia). If they are a non-playable enemy faction 'that appears in-game', they should be in also (i.e. Shadow Company, Makarov's Ultranationalists).
 * Countries: If a country has combatants in the game, or has fighting occur in it (i.e. Russia, the United States), it should be included.
 * Locations: These should be included in the level pages (i.e. the Gulag building should have info, or a section, on The Gulag page.)
 * Weapons: Should be included if usable.
 * Vehicles: If the player rides in one (i.e. CH-46 Sea Knight, UH-60 Black Hawk), is assisted by one (i.e. AH-1, AH-64), or is attacked by one (or enemies that come out of that vehicle) (i.e., Mi-8, Mi-24) it should be on the wiki.
 * Other: If it's usable (i.e. Medical Kits, DSM), it should be on the site.