The Notabilias Podcast
By Notabilias
Categories: Society & Culture, Education
Daily field notes on what earns a place in the world's encyclopedia — sourcing, notability and the quiet mechanics of Wikipedia, with Adrian and Nora. From Notabilias, the independent English-Wikipedia consultancy. Written by the Notabilias editorial team; the voices of Adrian and Nora are AI-generated, so each note can reach you the same day it is written. notabilias.com
106 episodes indexed on PodSearch.
Recent episodes
- Disclose before you're reported
Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest noticeboard decides something simple but consequential: whether an account explained itself before being asked, or only after. We walk through how a report actually unfolds, why disclosed accounts get short threads, and what the long version looks like for everyone…
- What makes a trait defining?
Wikipedia categories look decorative, but a specific rule — WP:DEFINING — decides what actually belongs in one, and it has nothing to do with whether a fact is true. We walk through why a '30 under 30' mention can be accurate and still not earn a category, and what over-categorization looks like…
- The username blacklist
Wikipedia rejects usernames that read as a company or a shared team account, often before the account has made a single edit. We walk through how the username policy actually gets enforced, what a soft block does and doesn't do, and where paid-editing disclosure belongs instead. With Adrian and…
- No sitelink has ever won a deletion discussion
Having an article on the Italian or German Wikipedia feels like proof a subject qualifies, but every language edition reviews notability on its own. We unpack why a Wikidata sitelink doesn't transfer a verdict, and what actually crosses the border: the sources, not the conclusion. With Adrian and…
- Fix the reason, not the prose
A recreated Wikipedia article can be deleted again within minutes under criterion G4, and rewriting the prose never satisfies it. We unpack what G4 actually checks, how 'salting' stops repeat attempts, and the two real paths back: deletion review and a properly sourced draft through Articles for…
- The draft with nothing behind it
English Wikipedia's 2026 guideline on AI-written text didn't start with a ban on style — it started with fabricated citations. We unpack the 44-2 vote, why fluent drafts now get more scrutiny rather than less, and what a language model can and can't actually do for a Wikipedia submission. With…
- Thirty days, one uninvolved editor
A stalled Wikipedia talk-page dispute doesn't get resolved by more arguing — it gets escalated through a request for comment, a process built to summon editors who've never read the article. We explain the neutral-question discipline the format demands, how closing works without a vote, and why…
- Where the donation goes
Does donating to Wikipedia get a company's article fixed? Adrian and Nora explain why the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs the servers and the yearly fundraiser, has no editorial role in any article — and where the one real channel for a legitimate correction actually is. With Adrian and Nora…
- Why 'sources' is plural
One excellent, in-depth profile isn't always enough to satisfy Wikipedia's notability guideline. Adrian and Nora explain why the guideline asks for sources, plural, and what that single-source problem actually means for founders and anyone researching a subject. With Adrian and Nora. Read the full…
- Who gets written about?
Women make up under a fifth of English Wikipedia's biographies, a gap WikiProject Women in Red has tracked for a decade. This episode explains why Wikipedia's notability guideline is blind to gender but not to the uneven historical record it has to work from, using NASA's Hidden Figures…
- A spike in traffic is a spike in scrutiny
A sudden jump in a Wikipedia article's pageviews feels like safety, but no notability guideline counts readers — only independent sources do. This episode explains why a traffic spike usually draws more editors' attention rather than less, and why page protection during high-visibility periods…
- Write a hook that survives review
Did You Know puts one sentence from a brand-new Wikipedia article on the Main Page — but the hook has to clear a neutrality review before anyone even checks the source. This episode breaks down the five-times-length and seven-day rules, the volunteer review process, and why a promotional hook…
- 'Our annual report has the numbers'
A literacy foundation listed forty-one media mentions, but only one of them was independent of the organization itself. This episode breaks down WP:NORG, the notability standard for nonprofits, and why annual reports, impact studies, and grant press releases don't count as sources. With Adrian and…
- Before the embargo lifted
A startup's Wikipedia draft was fully sourced and still got declined, because the funding round it described hadn't closed yet. This episode breaks down WP:TOOSOON, the guideline against premature articles, and how it differs from Wikipedia's rule against treating a single news cycle as…
- Does a bestseller badge count as a review?
An Amazon bestseller ribbon proves a sales spike, not that anyone read the book. This episode breaks down WP:NBOOK, Wikipedia's five-part notability test for books, and why two real reviews outweigh any sales rank. With Adrian and Nora. Read the full note…
- The second wave of coverage
Eleven headlines in a single day and nothing afterward sank one company's Wikipedia article under WP:NOTNEWS, while a quieter launch revisited months later survived. This episode breaks down what sustained coverage actually means, and why headline count isn't the test. With Adrian and Nora. Read…
- No one needs to read your edit to block it
Some Wikipedia edits never make it into the page's history — not because they were reverted, but because an automated filter blocked the save before it happened. This episode explains how edit filters work, why some are kept private, and what the gap between a human revert and a filter's disallow…
- The paragraph that outlived its own edit
Fixing a Wikipedia article doesn't fix every copy of it. This episode explains why CC BY-SA licensing lets mirror sites, aggregators, and AI tools keep serving an old version of a page long after the original was corrected — and what that means for managing a correction properly. With Adrian and…
- After the votes are counted
Running for office doesn't automatically earn a Wikipedia article, but holding certain ones does. This episode looks at Wikipedia's notability guideline for politicians, why most campaign coverage counts as routine, and what happens to a losing candidate's article after the votes are counted. With…
- The criteria that used to be enough
In 2022, Wikipedia's guideline for athletes stopped presuming notability from a single match, cap, or Olympic appearance. This episode looks at what the rewrite actually demands now — a real source, not just a stats database — and what that means for biographies built on numbers alone. With Adrian…
- Keep the short description boring
The sentence Wikipedia shows under a name in mobile search and app results is the short description, and it isn't always written where people expect. A look at where it lives, why promotional language gets reverted within hours, and how to fix one under a declared conflict of interest. With Adrian…
- 'We have two million streams'
Two million monthly Spotify listeners does nothing for an artist under Wikipedia's notability guideline for musicians, WP:NMUSIC — the rule runs on chart positions, certifications, and label credits instead. We break down which charts actually count, why Spotify's own rankings don't, and what…
- Read past the byline
Most corporate coverage is a press release with a byline stapled on — and Wikipedia's notability guideline for companies, WP:NCORP, checks for exactly that. We walk through the 'Independent Content' test, a classic funding-round example that fails it, and what a source has to do to actually pass…
- Scrutiny is the price of the tools
Wikipedia administrators gain no extra say over what an article should say — only the technical means to carry out what a public, week-long process already decided. We walk through how a request for adminship actually works, what tips a candidacy toward failure, and why the authority it grants is…
- Who gets the name without the parentheses?
When two notable people, places, or companies share a name, Wikipedia doesn't give the plain title to whoever is more prominent today. We walk through the primary topic rule, how usage evidence decides it, and why living at a disambiguated title costs a subject nothing. With Adrian and Nora. Read…
PodSearch is a free, independent podcast search engine. Read about PodSearch, the privacy policy or contact us.