Wikipedia:Kelayakan artikel/Organisasi dan perusahaan: Perbedaan antara revisi

Dari Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia, ensiklopedia bebas
Jelajahi riwayat secara interaktif
← Revisi sebelumnyaRevisi selanjutnya →
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
VisualTeks wiki
Hanamanteo (bicara | kontrib)
45.287 suntingan
k Membatalkan 16 suntingan by RaFaDa20631 (bicara): Perubahan besar tanpa melewati konsensus (TW)
Tag: Pembatalan
Hanamanteo (bicara | kontrib)
45.287 suntingan
-
Tag: Pembatalan
Baris 2: Baris 2:
{{shortcut|WP:ORG|WP:PERUSAHAAN|WP:PERSEROAN|WP:ORGANISASI}}
{{shortcut|WP:ORG|WP:PERUSAHAAN|WP:PERSEROAN|WP:ORGANISASI}}
{{layak}}
{{layak}}
Halaman ini digunakan untuk menentukan seberapakah organisasi dan perusahaan (komersial dll.), atau produk-produk dan jasanya, layak untuk dijadikan artikel Wikipedia. Lingkup panduan ini mencakup semua kelompok orang yang berserikat/berkumpul untuk suatu tujuan dengan pengecualian lembaga pendidikan nirlaba, agama atau sekte, dan tim olahraga. Jika subjek lain memiliki pedoman kelayakan yang lebih spesifik, kelayakan ini atau kelayakan sesuai topiknya dapat berlaku. Misalnya artikel bertopik grup band dapat mematuhi [[WP:BAND]].
Halaman ini berisi ketentuan yang dipakai untuk menentukan apakah suatu subyek layak atau tidak untuk dibuatkan artikelnya di dalam Wikipedia. Kebijakan ini mencakup semua kelompok orang yang berorganisasi untuk mencapai tujuan tertentu. Kebijakan ini mengatur organisasi komersial maupun non-komersial, antara lain, tapi tidak terbatas pada: [[perusahaan]], [[organisasi]], [[korporasi]], [[institusi pendidikan]], [[klub sosial]], [[agama]], [[sekte]], [[perhimpunan]], [[kemitraan]], dan lain-lain.


'''Suatu subjek dianggap layak apabila memenuhi minimal ''satu'' kriteria di bawah'''. Apabila artikel tidak memenuhi satu pun kriteria yang disebutkan di bawah, maka artikel yang bersangkutan dapat dihapus baik secara langsung maupun melalui prosedur penghapusan. Jika hasil prosedur penghapusan menyatakan "diterima" maka artikel yang bersangkutan dinyatakan "layak".
Secara singkat organisasi merupakan kumpulan orang-orang yang memiliki tujuan tertentu, baik komersial maupun tidak. Termasuk seperti [[organisasi amal]], [[partai politik]], [[rumah sakit]], lembaga, organisasi minat dan bakat, klub sosial, perusahaan dan badan usaha, atau lembaga pendidikan komersial.


Kebijakan ini juga berlaku kepada artikel-artikel yang dibuat sebelum kebijakan ini disetujui dan menggantikan "Wikipedia:Kelayakan artikel (perusahaan)".
Tidak mencakup artikel bertopik keluarga, grup seni hiburan, kelompok penulis, dan kelompok penemu, baca: [[WP:TOKOH]].


== Kriteria umum ==
==Keputusan berdasarkan bukti terverifikasi==
{{Main|Wikipedia:Kelayakan artikel#Artikel yang memenuhi kriteria kelayakan}}
; [[WP:LAYAK|Artikel yang memenuhi kriteria kelayakan]]
{{Info
{{shortcut|WP:ORGIN}}
| pesan = Suatu subjek dianggap layak apabila telah mendapatkan pembahasan yang signifikan oleh [[Wikipedia:Sumber tepercaya|sumber tepercaya]] yang independen terhadap subjek.
Untuk bisa dikatakan layak, [[WP:ST|sumber-sumber tepercaya]] yang tidak memiliki keterkaitan langsung dengan subjeknya baik organisasi maupun produknya wajib disertakan sebagai bahan bukti. Kelayakan tersebut harus berdasarkan sumber-sumber terpublikasi—bahkan jika sumbernya belum didaftarkan secara langsung pada artikel (silakan kembangkan atau tambahkan sendiri jika belum ada).

===Tak ada kelayakan yang tetap===
{{shortcut|WP:ORGSIG}}
Tidak ada perusahaan atau organisasi layak secara tetap, apapun jenis organisasinya, termasuk sekolah.<ref>But see also [[WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES]], especially for universities</ref> Jika organisasi memiliki sedikit atau bahkan tidak ada sama sekali sumber independen, dianggap tidak layak karena apa pun perusahaan yang ada [[WP:ENN|belum tentu layak]]. Ingat, "layak (''notable'')" TIDAK SAMA DENGAN "terkenal" atau "penting!" Tidak masalah seberapa "pentingnya" perusahaan Anda harus memiliki artikel di Wikipedia, tetapi sumber tepercaya itulah yang akan menentukan apakah artikel Anda dihapus

Dalam mengevaluasi kelayakan organisasi, atau produk, pertimbangkan apakah mereka sudah mempunyai dampak bagi masyarakat, budaya, hiburan, olahraga, ekonomi, sejarah, literatur, ilmu pengetahuan, atau pendidikan. Perusahaan besar dan produknya banyak memiliki informasi [[WP:V|terverifikasi]] dari sumber tepercaya yang bisa membuktikan kelayakan tersebut. Akan tetapi, perusahaan kecil dan produknya bisa layak. Yang penting, artikel Anda tidak boleh menciptakan suatu bias yang dapat menguntungkan organisasi atau produk Anda, mengingat kebanyakan artikel bertopik perusahaan kecil atau perseorangan sekalipun, tidak diperbolehkan disertakan karena [[WP:IKLAN|Wikipedia bukan tempat untuk beriklan]].[[WP:NOTADVERTISING]].

===Tak ada kelayakan yang diwariskan===
{{shortcut|WP:INHERITORG}}
{{further|WP:PRODUCT}}
Suatu organisasi dapat tidak layak meski ada orang atau peristiwa penting memiliki kaitan erat dengannya. Suatu perusahaan dapat tidak layak meski memiliki banyak anak perusahaan yang terkenal dan layak dibuatkan artikelnya. Organisasi atau perusahaan harus memiliki sumber tepercaya yang independen agar ditetapkan layak. Misalnya: jika ada orang yang layak artikelnya membeli perusahaan restoran, perusahaan itu tidak "mewarisi" kelayakan terkait anggotanya. Jika ada orang yang layak artikelnya masuk ke organisasi, organisasi itu tidak "mewarisi" kelayakan berdasarkan anggotanya.

Berlaku juga sebaliknya. Organisasi bisa layak artikelnya, tetapi organisasi tidak bisa "mewarisi" kelayakan artikel untuk tiap anggotanya. Begitu pula perusahaan terhadap anak-anak usahanya.

==Kriteria pokok==
{{shortcut|WP:ORGCRITE|WP:ORGCRIT}}

[[Perusahaan]], [[korporasi]], [[organisasi]], [[kelompok]], [[produk]], atau [[jasa]] dianggap '''layak bila subjeknya sudah banyak dicakup sumber-sumber sekunder tepercaya yang independen terhadap''' '''subjek.'''

Kriteria ini harus mematuhi [[WP:GNG|kelayakan umum]] dengan menekankan kualitas sumber untuk mencegah manipulasi yang dilakukan oleh pemasar profesional dan hubungan masyarakat (humas). Pedoman ini bertujuan untuk mencegah artikel Wikipedia yang bertopik perusahaan disalahgunakan sebagai media beriklan.

====Kriteria utama====
{{shortcut|WP:SIRS}}
Untuk menentukan artikel tersebut layak, sumber-sumber yang digunakan '''harus''':
# signifikan,
# independen terhadap subjek,
# [[WP:ST|tepercaya]],
# [[WP:SECONDARY|sumber sekunder]].

Tambahannya, sumber yang diberikan juga harus sebanyak-banyaknya dan tidak boleh hanya satu. Jika sumbernya diragukan, sumber tersebut harus dihilangkan atau ditandai belum bisa membangun kelayakan.

{{Quote box
|title = Contoh
|quote = Saya membaca artikel berjudul [[Acme Corporation|Acme Inc.]] mengutip empat sumber: satu kalimat dari ''[[The New York Times]]'' yang menunjukkan keunggulan produk Acme dibandingkan produk pesaing; tulisan profil perusahaan di ''[[Forbes]]'' yang ditulis oleh kontributor bukan karyawan perusahaan; satu kiriman blog oleh penggemar TI yang menampilkan tinjauan produknya; dan sebuah putusan pengadilan yang menuntut pesaing terkait pelanggaran hak paten. Analisis:
* ''The New York Times'' tepercaya, independen, dan sekunder – tetapi tidak mempunyai signifikansi (satu kalimat yang menyebutkan artikel perusahaan lain).
* Profil perusahaan di blog ''Forbes'' blog sangat signifikan dan sekunder – tetapi tidak tepercaya dan independen (kiriman itu disponsor oleh perusahaan atau bersumber dari materi pemasaran perusahaan).
* Kiriman blog ini signifikan dan sekunder – tetapi dapat tidak independen (terkadang bersponsor; jadi tanpa bukti sebaliknya, penulis harus berhati-hati dan mengecualikan sumbernya) dan tidak tepercaya (karya yang tidak dipublikasikan sendiri umumnya tidak tepercaya).
* Putusan pengadilan bersifat signifikan, independen, dan tepercaya (karena itu adalah produk hukum terverifikasi) – tetapi tidak sekunder (sumber primer). Juga, putusan pengadilan tidak selalu dapat dianggap sebagai fakta untuk apa pun di luar tindakan hukum yang diambil; tuntutan itu tidak terbukti sampai kasus itu selesai.
Artinya artikel tidak memiliki sumber tunggal yang bisa digunakan untuk membangun kelayakan artikel perusahaan.
|author =
|source =
|align =
|width =
|border =
|fontsize =
|bgcolor =
|style =
|title_bg =
|title_fnt =
|tstyle =
|qalign =
|qstyle =
|quoted =
|salign =
|sstyle =
}}
}}
# "Pembahasan yang signifikan" berarti sumber membahas subjek secara langsung, mendetail, dan ''nontrivial''.{{fn|1}}
Anda dapat merangkum informasi tersebut dalam tabel ini
# "Sumber",{{fn|2}} didefinisikan dalam Wikipedia sebagai [[Wikipedia:Bukan riset asli#Sumber primer dan sekunder|sumber sekunder]], harus dapat memberikan bukti kelayakan yang objektif. Lebih dari satu sumber lebih baik.
{| class=wikitable
# "Tepercaya" berarti sumber dapat digunakan untuk [[Wikipedia:Pemastian|pemastian]] kelayakan, sesuai pedoman '''[[Wikipedia:Sumber tepercaya|sumber tepercaya]]'''. Sumber berupa karya yang sudah dipublikasikan dalam bentuk media.
|-
# "Independen terhadap subyek" berarti sumber yang dirujuk tidak boleh berasal dari pihak-pihak yang berafiliasi langsung dengan subjek, misalnya: promosi diri, iklan, autobiografi, dll.
! Sumber || Signifikan? || Independen? || Tepercaya? || Sekunder? || Lulus/Gagal || Keterangan
|-
| ''The New York Times'' || {{nay}} || {{aye}} || {{aye}} || {{aye}} || {{nay}} || Ada satu kalimat yang membahas perusahaan lain
|-
| Profil di ''Forbes''||{{aye}} || {{nay}} || {{nay}} || {{aye}} || {{nay}} || Kebanyakan disponsori oleh perusahaan atau berdasarkan materi pemasaran perusahaan
|-
| Kiriman blog ||{{aye}} || {{hmmm}} || {{nay}} || {{aye}} || {{nay}} || Kiriman blog dapat bersponsor dan karya blog biasanya dipublikasikan sendiri
|-
| Putusan pengadilan ||{{aye}} || {{aye}} || {{aye}} || {{nay}} || {{nay}} || Sumber primer
|-
! colspan=5| Jumlah sumber terpenuhi || 0 || Harus ada banyak sumber yang mematuhi empat hal tersebut untuk bisa memenuhi syarat kelayakan
|}

====Signifikansi====
{{shortcut|WP:CORPDEPTH|WP:ORGDEPTH}}

Kedalaman cakupan subjek oleh sumber itu harus dipertimbangkan. Cakupan trivial atau insidental sangat tidak dianjurkan untuk membangun kelayakan. Cakupan yang dalam dan signifikan menyediakan ikhtisar, deskripsi, komentar, survei, studi, diskusi, analisis, atau evaluasi dari produk, perusahaan, atau organisasi.

''Kuantitas'' tidak menentukan signifikansi. Hanya kualitas konten yang bisa mengatur. Kumpulan banyak sumber trivial dianggap tidak signifikan; jumlah tayangan, hit, suka, bagikan, dll. sama sekali tidak dianggap signifikan. Mirip juga, statistik (seperti jumlah karyawan, pendapatan, laba, usia perusahaan, dll.) tidak membuat cakupan menjadi signifikan. Agar cakupannya signifikan, sumber harus menjelaskan dan ''membahas'' perlakuan terhadap karyawan dan perubahan kepemimpinan alih-alih hanya menyertakan fakta bahwa perusahaan mempekerjakan 500 orang atau menyebut bahwa Si Fulan bin Fulan menjadi CEO baru. Sehingga, signifikansi tidak ditentukan berdasarkan tingkat reputasi sumber terhadap subjek. Misalnya, artikel 400 kata di ''[[The Village Voice]]'' justru signifikan daripada kalimat tunggal pada ''[[The New York Times]]''. Namun,reputasi sumber dapat menentukan apakah sumber itu tepercaya dan independen.

Berikutnya, sumber-sumber ini tidak dapat ditransfer atau diatribusikan di antara pihak terkait. Sumber yang mendeskripsikan topik khusus yang berkaitan dengan organisasi tidak boleh dianggap memberikan cakupan yang signifikan dari organisasi itu. Oleh karena itu, artikel tentang penarikan produk atau biografi CEO memiliki cakupan signifikan di artikel Wikipedia terkait produk atau CEO, tetapi tidak boleh dimasukkan dalam artikel perusahaan.

=====Contoh cakupan trivial=====
Sumber trivial yang gagal membangun kelayakan artikel bertopik perusahaan antara lain:
* kompilasi atau daftar sederhana berupa
** nomor telepon, alamat, jam buka
** lokasi kantor pusat, kantor cabang, waralaba
** karyawan, pimpinan, direksi, atau pemegang saham
** penawaran produk dan layanan
** manual, spesifikasi, atau sertifikasi produk
** paten, testimoni, dan gugatan hukum
** jadwal acara dan hasilnya (ditempatkan pada artikelnya tersendiri apabila itu penting)
** data statistik lainnya.
*pengumuman atau pemberitahuan seperti
** perubahan harga saham atau obligasi
** laporan keuangan triwulan, tahunan, dan perkiraan penghasilan
** pembukaan kantor pusat, kantor cabang, atau waralaba
** peluncuran lini produk, diskon, perubahan harga, atau penarikan produksi
** partisipasi dalam acara-acara industri, seperti pameran perdagangan atau diskusi panel
** acara korporasi atau RUPS
** perekrutan, promosi-degradasi, dan PHK karyawan
** ekspansi, akuisisi, penjualan, atau penutupan bisnis
** transaksi modal.
*pernyataan yang cepat usang seperti
** penghargaan tidak ''notable'' yang diterima organisasi, orang atau produknya
** of sponsorship of events, non-profit organizations, or volunteer work,
** in quotations from an organization's personnel as story sources,
** as an example of a type of company or product being discussed (e.g. "In response to the protests, various companies, such as Acme Inc, have pledged to address working conditions in their factories")
* inclusion in lists of similar organizations, particularly in "best of", "top 100", "fastest growing" or similar lists,<ref>If the list itself is [[Wikipedia:Notable|notable]], such as the [[Fortune 500]] and the ''[[Michelin Guide]]'', the inclusion counts like any other reliable source, but it does not exempt the article from the [[WP:NRVE|normal value of providing evidence]] that independent sources discuss the subject.</ref>
* inclusion in collections that have indiscriminate inclusion criteria (i.e. attempt to include every existing item instead of selecting the best, most notable examples), such as databases, archives, directories, dictionaries, bibliographies, certain almanacs,
* coverage of purely local events, incidents, controversies (see also [[#Audience]] below),
* presentations, speeches, lectures, etc. given by organization's personnel,
* other listings and mentions not accompanied by commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization.

The examples above are not meant to be exhaustive.

See [[#Product reviews]] for a full discussion on what reviews of restaurants, events, and products qualify as significant coverage.

=====Examples of substantial coverage=====
Examples of substantial coverage that would generally be sufficient to meet the requirement:
* A news article discussing a prolonged controversy regarding a corporate merger,
* A scholarly article, a book passage, or ongoing media coverage focusing on a product or organization,
* A documentary film exploring environmental impact of the corporation's facilities or products,
* An encyclopedia entry giving an overview of the history of an organization,
* A report by a consumer watchdog organization on the safety of a specific product,
* An extensive how-to guide written by people wholly independent of the company or product (e.g. ''[[For Dummies]]'').

=====Audience=====
{{shortcut|WP:AUD}}
The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of significant coverage by international or national, or at least [[Newspaper#Local or regional|regional]], media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention <em>solely</em> from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least <em>one</em> regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary.

=====Illegal conduct=====
{{shortcut|WP:ILLCON}}
It is possible that an organization that is not itself generally [[WP:NOTE|notable]] will have a number of significant sources discussing its (alleged) illegal conduct. Sources that primarily discuss purely such conduct shall not be used to establish an organization's notability per this guideline. However, the organization may still be notable, in whole or in part due to such sources, under different guidelines, e.g., [[WP:CRIME]].

====Independent sources====
{{also|WP:INDEPENDENT|WP:COI}}
{{shortcut|WP:ORGIND}}
A primary test of notability is whether unrelated people with no [[Vested interest (communication theory)|vested interest]] in the subject have actually considered the company, corporation, product or service notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon it. [[WP:SPIP|Self-promotion]] and [[product placement]] are not routes to qualifying for an encyclopedia article. There are two types of independence to consider when evaluating sources:
* Independence of the ''author'' (or functional independence): the author must be unrelated to the company, organization, or product. Related persons include organization's personnel, owners, investors, (sub)contractors, vendors, distributors, suppliers, other business partners and associates, customers, competitors, sponsors and sponsorees (including [[astroturfing]]), and other parties that have something, financially or otherwise, to gain or lose.
* Independence of the ''content'' (or intellectual independence): the content must not be produced by interested parties. Too often a related party produces a narrative that is then copied, regurgitated, and published in whole or in part by independent parties (as exemplified by [[churnalism]]). Independent content, in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and [[fact checking]] that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject.

[[Trade magazine|Trade publications]] must be used with great care. While feature stories<ref>A feature story is usually a longer article where the writer has researched and interviewed to tell a factual story about a person, place, event, idea, or issue. Features are not opinion-driven are more in-depth than traditional news stories.</ref> from leading trade magazines may be used where independence is clear, there is a presumption against the use of coverage in trade magazines to establish notability. This is because businesses often use these publications to increase their visibility.<ref>{{cite news|title=Trade magazines: Still a marketer’s best friend?|url=http://inprela.com/2017/05/30/trade-magazines-still-marketers-best-friend/|work=Inprela Communications|date=30 May 2017}}</ref>

If a source's independence is of any doubt, it is better to exercise caution and exclude it from determining quality sources for the purposes of establishing notability. If contested, consensus on the use of sources can be sought at the [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard|Reliable sources/Noticeboard]].

Once notability is established, [[WP:PRIMARY|primary sources]] and [[WP:Identifying and using self-published works|self-published sources]] ''may'' be used with appropriate care to verify some of the article's content. See [[Wikipedia:Autobiography]] for the verifiability and neutrality problems that affect material where the subject of the article itself is the source of the material.

=====Examples of dependent coverage=====
Examples of dependent coverage that is ''not'' sufficient to establish notability:
* press releases, press kits, or similar [[public relations]] materials
* any material that is substantially based on such press releases even if published by independent sources ([[churnalism]]),
* advertising and marketing materials by, about, or on behalf of the organization,
**including pieces like "case studies" or "success stories" by Chambers of Commerce, business incubators, consulting firms, etc.
* any paid or sponsored articles, posts, and other publications,
**including pieces by non-staff "contributors" to [[Forbes]], [[Huffington Post]], [[Entrepreneur.com]], [[Inc.com]], [[TechCrunch]], [[Medium.com]], and other publications that accept public contributions and that do not provide meaningful editorial oversight of the submitted content,
* [[wikt:self-publishing|self-published]] materials, including [[vanity press]],
* [[patent]]s, whether pending or granted,<ref>Patents are written and published solely at the direction of the inventor or organization that the inventor assigned the patent to. Their contents are ''not'' verified to be accurate by the patent offices or any other independent agency. See [[Wikipedia:Reliable source examples#Are patents reliable sources?]].</ref>
* any material written or published, including websites, by the organization, its members, or sources closely associated with it, directly or indirectly,
* other works in which the company, corporation, organization, or group talks about itself—whether published by itself, or re-printed by other people (for example, self-submitted biographies to ''[[Who's Who]]'').

====Multiple sources====
{{shortcut|WP:MULTSOURCES}}
A single significant independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization.

"Source" on Wikipedia can refer to the work itself, the author of the work, and/or the publisher of the work. For notability purposes, sources must be unrelated to each other to be "multiple". A story from a single news organization (such as [[Associated Press|AP]]) reprinted in multiple newspapers (say, in the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'', and the ''[[Orlando Sentinel]]'') is still one source (one newspaper article). If multiple journalists at multiple newspapers separately and independently write about the same subject, then each of these unrelated articles should be considered separate sources, even if they are writing about the same event or "story". A series of articles by the same journalist is still treated as one source (one person). The appearance of different articles in the same newspaper is still one source (one publisher). Similarly, a series of books by the same author is one source.

The existence of multiple significant independent sources needs to be demonstrated. Hypothetical sources (e.g. "the company is big/old/important so there must be more sources, I just don't have/can't find them") do not count towards the notability requirement.

The word "multiple" is not a set number and depends on the type of organization or product. Editors should recognize certain biases, such as [[Wikipedia:Recentism|recentism]] (greater availability of recent sources) when assessing historical companies or [[Wikipedia:Systemic bias|systemic bias]] (greater availability of English and Western sources) when discussing organizations in the developing world. Therefore, for example, a Bangladeshi women's rights organization from the 1960s might establish notability with just one or two quality sources, while the same is not true for a tech start-up in a major U.S. metropolitan area.

====Reliable sources====
{{see also|WP:SOURCE|WP:RS}}
Reliable sources, generally, are third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. The best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments. The greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Questionable sources are those that have a poor reputation for checking the facts, lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest. Self-published sources are generally not accepted as reliable sources. For a full discussion on what is and what is not a reliable source, see [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources]].

====Secondary sources====
{{see also|WP:SECONDARY}}

A [[secondary source]] provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. Secondary sources are not necessarily significant, reliable or independent sources.

A [[primary source]] is original material that is close to an event, and is often an account written by people who are directly involved. Primary sources cannot be used to establish notability. In a business setting, frequently encountered primary sources include:
* corporate annual or financial reports, proxy statements,
* memoirs or interviews by executives,
* public announcements of corporate actions (press releases),
* court filings, patent applications,
* government audit or inspection reports,
* customer testimonials or complaints,
* product instruction manuals or specifications.

====Product reviews====
{{shortcut|WP:PRODUCTREV}}
Product, event, and restaurant reviews (i.e. where author describes personal opinions and experiences) must be handled with great care and diligence. Some types of reviews have a longer history and established traditions (e.g. restaurants, wine, books, movies), while other (e.g. new tech gadgets, travel blogs) are newer and more prone to manipulation by marketing and public relations personnel. Like any other source, reviews must meet the primary criteria to be counted towards the notability requirement:
#Be significant: brief and routine reviews (including [[Zagat]]) do not qualify. Significant reviews are where the author has personally experienced or tested the product and describes their experiences in some depth, provides broader context, and draws comparisons with other products. Reviews that narrowly focus on a particular product or function without broader context (e.g. review of a particular meal without description of the restaurant as a whole) do not count as significant sources. Reviews that are too generic or vague to make the determination whether the author had personal experience with the reviewed product are not to be counted as significant sources. Further, the reviews must be published outside of purely local or narrow (highly specialized) interest publications (see also [[#Audience]]). For example, a review of a local [[harvest festival]] in a local newspaper or a book review in a newsletter by a city's library would not qualify as significant coverage.
#Be independent: many reviews are not independent and are, in fact, a type of advertisement and [[product placement]]. [[Review#Bought review|Sponsored reviews]] include reviews where the reviewed product is provided free of charge to the author. Often, sponsored nature of a review is not disclosed and not immediately apparent. In particular, a strong indication of a sponsored or other relationship is a review that is excessively positive or negative. Therefore, editors should use reviews ''only'' from sources with well established reputation for independence and objectivity. Further, reviews that simply regurgitate someone else's opinion are also not independent sources unless enough original work was put in to produce a [[meta]] review (e.g. [[review aggregator]]s). If the suitability of a source is in doubt, it is better to exercise caution and to exclude the source for the purposes of establishing notability. Once notability is established, not independent reviews ''may'' be used to verify some non-controversial facts in the article (e.g. number of employees, number of tables in a restaurant, product models).
#Be reliable: the reviews must be published in reliable sources that provide editorial oversight and strive to maintain objectivity. Self-published reviews (e.g. most blogs) do not qualify.

==Special note: advertising and promotion==
{{shortcut|WP:ADPROMO}}
[[WP:NOTADVERTISING|Advertising]] is prohibited as an official Wikipedia policy. Advertising should be removed by following these steps, in order:
# [[Wikipedia:cleanup|Clean up]] per [[Wikipedia:NPOV]]
# Erase remaining advertising content from the article
# Delete the article by listing it at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]] if no notable content remains. However, if an article contains only blatant advertising, with no other useful content, it may be tagged per [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion]] instead.

==Alternate criteria for specific types of organizations==
The following sections discuss alternate methods for establishing notability in specific situations. '''No organization is considered notable except to the extent that independent sources demonstrate that it has been noticed by people outside of the organization.''' These criteria constitute an optional, alternative method for demonstrating notability. Organizations are considered notable if they meet one of the following sourcing requirements
# these alternate criteria,
# the [[#Primary criteria|primary criteria]] for organizations, ''or''
# the [[WP:GNG|general notability guideline]]

''and'' the article complies with the policy [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]], especially with regards to avoiding indiscriminate inclusion of information.

===Non-commercial organizations===
{{shortcut|WP:CLUB|WP:NONPROFIT|WP:NGO}}
Organizations are usually notable if they meet '''both''' of the following standards:
# The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
# The organization has received significant coverage in multiple [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that are [[WP:Independent sources|independent]] of the organization.

Additional considerations are:
* ''Nationally well-known local organizations:'' Some organizations are local in scope, but have achieved national or even international notice. Organizations whose activities are local in scope (e.g., a school or club) can be considered notable if there is [[WP:NRVE|substantial verifiable evidence of coverage]] by reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area. Where coverage is only local in scope, consider adding a section on the organization to an article on the organization's local area instead.
* ''Factors that have attracted widespread attention:'' The organization’s longevity, size of membership, major achievements, prominent scandals, or other factors specific to the organization should be considered to the extent that these factors have been reported by independent sources. This list is not exhaustive and not conclusive.
*Caveat – Be cautious of claims that small organizations are national or international in scale. The fact that an organization has branches in multiple countries does not ''necessarily'' mean that its activities are ''truly'' international. Example: a tiny fraternal organization with a total membership of sixty members, worldwide, is not "international in scale" simply because the members live in separate countries and have formed sub-chapters where they live.

====Local units of larger organizations====
{{shortcut|WP:BRANCH}}
* As a general rule, the individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not considered notable enough to warrant a separate article – ''unless'' they are substantially discussed by reliable independent sources that extend beyond the chapter's local area.
* In some cases, a specific local chapter or sub-organization that is not considered notable enough for its own article may be significant enough to mention ''within the context'' of an article about the parent organization. If the parent article grows to the point where information needs to be split off to a new article, remember that when you split off an article about a local chapter, the local chapter itself must comply with Wikipedia's [[WP:N|notability]] guidelines, without reference to the notability of the parent organization. Take care not to split off a section that would be considered non-notable on its own. Splitting should occur as a top-down process. See {{tl|splitsection}}.
* ''Aim for one good article, not multiple [[WP:Permastub|permanent stubs]]:'' Individual chapters, divisions, departments, and other sub-units of notable organizations are only rarely notable enough to warrant a separate article. Information on chapters and affiliates should normally be merged into the article about the parent organization. ''See [[Wikipedia:Merging]].''
* Information on sub-chapters of notable organizations might be included in either prose or [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists|a brief list]] in the main article on the organization. If an embedded list becomes too large for the parent article, consideration may be given to [[Wikipedia:Splitting|splitting]] out as a [[WP:LISTCOMPANY|stand-alone list]] only if there are reliable sources dealing with the list as a topic, as with [[Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities]] supporting [[List of Phi Kappa Psi chapters and colonies]]. If an embedded list is too large, but is not notable enough for a stand-alone list, then [[Wikipedia:Handling trivia#Recommendations for handling trivia|consider trimming]].

===Schools===
{{shortcut|WP:NSCHOOL|WP:NHSCHOOL}}
All universities, colleges and schools, including high schools, middle schools, primary (elementary) schools, and schools that only provide a support to mainstream education must satisfy either this guideline ([[WP:ORG]]) or the [[WP:GNG|general notability guideline]], or both. For-profit educational organizations and institutions are considered ''commercial organizations'' and must satisfy those criteria. (See also [[WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES]], especially for universities.)

===Churches===
{{shortcut|WP:NCHURCH}}
Individual religious organizations, congregations and churches must meet the notability guideline for organizations and companies or the [[WP:GNG|general notability guideline]] or both. The fact that a church building is listed on a major historic register such as the [[National Heritage List for England]] or the [[National Register of Historic Places]] in the U.S. does not necessarily mean that the religious organization that owns or meets in the building is notable. However, it is quite possible for a building to be notable independently from the institution, and then a combined article about the institution and the building is justified.

===Commercial organizations===
Some commercial organizations meet Wikipedia notability guidelines but care must be taken in determining whether they are truly notable and whether the article is an attempt to use Wikipedia for free advertising. Wikipedia editors should not create articles on commercial organizations for the purpose of overtly or covertly advertising a company. Please see [[WP:NOTADVERTISING]].
{{-}}

====Publicly traded corporations====
{{short|WP:LISTED}}
There has been considerable discussion over time whether publicly traded corporations, or at least publicly traded corporations listed on major stock exchanges such as the [[NYSE]] and other comparable international stock exchanges, are inherently notable. Consensus has been that notability is not automatic in this (or any other) case. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such companies, so that notability can be established using the primary criterion discussed above. Examples of such sources include independent press coverage and analyst reports. Accordingly, article authors should make sure to seek out such coverage and add references to such articles to properly establish notability.

Editors coming across an article on such a company without such references are encouraged to search (or request that others search) prior to nominating for deletion, given the very high (but not ''certain'') likelihood that a publicly traded company is actually notable according to the primary criterion.

====Chains and franchises====
{{short|WP:CHAIN}}
Many companies have chains of local stores or franchises that are individually pretty much interchangeable—for instance, a local [[McDonald's]]. Since there is generally very little to say about individual stores or franchises that is not true for the chain in general, Wikipedia should not have articles on such individual stores. In rare cases, an individual location will have architectural peculiarities that makes it notable, such as the [[Shell Service Station (Winston-Salem, North Carolina)]]; however, a series of articles on every single Wal-Mart in China would not be informative. An exception can be made if a major event occurred at a local store; however, this would most likely be created under an article name that describes the ''event'', not the location (see [[San Ysidro McDonald's massacre]] for an example).

===Products and services===
{{shortcut|WP:PRODUCT|WP:NPRODUCT}}
{{see also|Wikipedia:Notability#Articles not satisfying the notability guidelines}}
If a company is notable, information on its products and services should generally be included in the article on the company itself, ''unless'' the company article is so large that this would make the article unwieldy.

When discussion of products and services ''would'' make the article unwieldy, some editorial judgment is called for. If the products and services are considered notable enough on their own, one option is to break out the discussion of them into a separate article following [[WP:Summary style]]. If the products and services are ''not'' notable enough for their own article, the discussion of them should be trimmed and summarized into a shorter format, or even cut entirely if the products are not significantly mentioned in [[WP:RS|reliable secondary sources]].

Avoid creating multiple stubs about each individual product ({{red|PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator, Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator, R-36 Explosive Space Modulator}}, etc.) especially if there is [[WP:PERMASTUB|no realistic hope of expansion]].

If a non-notable product or service has its own article, be bold and [[Wikipedia:Merge|merge]] it into an article with a broader scope (for example, an article about the type of product) or follow one of the [[WP:DELETE|deletion processes]].


Selain keempat kriteria umum di atas, sebuah perusahaan, organisasi, tim, agama, grup, dll, dianggap '''layak''', apabila telah menjadi subyek pembahasan pada sumber sekunder, antara lain,
Note that a specific product or service may be notable on its own, without the company providing it being notable in its own right.
* buku,
* artikel koran,
* film dokumenter, dan
* laporan oleh organisasi pemerhati konsumen.


Sumber-sumber berikut '''tidak dapat''' dijadikan sebagai sumber artikel:
==Jika tidak layak==
* Rilis pers oleh subyek; otobiografi; iklan perusahaan, organisasi, maupun grup; dan karya lain di mana organisasi subyek membahas diri sendiri.
{{Shortcuts|WP:FAILORG|WP:FAILCORP}}
* Karya yang membahas secara sambil lalu saja (''trivial''). Misalnya artikel koran yang hanya menyebut nama organisasi tanpa membahas, publikasi alamat dan nomer telepon, dan pencantuman pada direktori bisnis.


Bantulah Wikipedia dengan mencantumkan sumber tersebut di artikel. Wikipediawan lain mungkin tidak sempat mencari atau tidak memiliki akses ke sumber sekunder yang ada.
Although an organization that fails to meet the criteria of this guideline should not have a separate article, information about the organization may nevertheless be included in other ways in Wikipedia provided that certain conditions are met.


== Kriteria khusus ==
Content about the organization can be added into relevant articles if it:
=== Perusahaan ===
* has the [[WP:DUE|appropriate level]] of detail and significance for that article;
* Tercantum dalam daftar perusahaan yang dikeluarkan oleh lembaga independen yang dikenal, misalnya Fortune 500, Forbes 500, atau daftar perusahaan besar yang dikeluarkan oleh pemerintah.
* [[WP:NOTADVERT|avoids self-promotion]]; and
* Pernah atau sedang diperdagangkan di suatu bursa efek.
* only includes information that can be [[Wikipedia:Verfiability|verified]] through [[WP:Independent sources|independent sources]].
* Perusahaan telah mendapatkan penghargaan tingkat internasional atau nasional yang signifikan.


=== Organisasi ===
For organizations local to a city, town, or county, content conforming to the above criteria may be added to articles for that locale. For example, a business that is significant to the history or economy of a small town might be described in the ''History'' or ''Economy'' section of the small town.
* Cabang dari organisasi internasional atau nasional tidak layak untuk dibuatkan artikel tersendiri, kecuali apabila unsur kelayakan telah terpenuhi oleh pembahasan pada sumber sekunder.
* Organisasi tingkat daerah tidak layak untuk dibuatkan artikel tersendiri, kecuali apabila unsur kelayakan telah terpenuhi oleh pembahasan pada sumber sekunder.


==Lihat pula==
== Larangan ==
* '''Dilarang menyertakan [[WP:NOVISIMISI|visi dan misi]] dalam artikel yang Anda buat. Wikipedia adalah ensiklopedia, bukan halaman profil perusahaan/organisasi.''' Konten semacam ini bukan merupakan teks ensiklopedis (tidak ada satu pun ensiklopedia cetak yang menyertakan visi dan misi pada artikel bertopik perusahaan) serta dapat saja bersumber dari situs resmi perusahaan, yang '''dianggap tidak independen terhadap subjek''' (lihat pula [[Pranala luar]]), sehingga harus disembunyikan atau dihapus. Apabila kedapatan melakukan [[WP:PLAGIAT|salin-dan-tempel]] dari situs web resmi perusahaan, akan disembunyikan atau dihapus karena plagiarisme adalah pelanggaran hak cipta. Silakan kembangkan sendiri dengan kalimat-kalimat lain yang lebih ensiklopedis.
* [[Wikipedia:Pedoman penamaan/Organisasi]]
* [[wikipedia:Otobiografi|Wikipedia:Autobiografi]]
'''Esai:'''
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia bukanlah LinkedIn]]


== Artikel yang tidak memenuhi ==
==Catatan kaki==
Apabila suatu artikel belum memperlihatkan unsur kelayakan, usahakan untuk memperbaikinya dengan cara:
{{reflist}}
# [[Wikipedia:Jangan ragu menyunting artikel|Perbaiki sendiri]]. Carilah referensi tepercaya dari internet atau media lain
# Gunakan templat <code><nowiki>{{subst:tak layak}}</nowiki></code>untuk menarik perhatian penyunting lain
# [[Wikipedia:Penggabungan dan pemindahan|Gabungkan]] artikel kepada artikel lain yang cakupannya lebih luas
# Apabila belum berhasil ditemukan unsur kelayakan dua minggu setelah templat <code><nowiki>{{subst:tak layak}}</nowiki></code> diberikan, maka artikel tersebut akan segera dihapus.


Apabila suatu artikel jelas tidak memenuhi unsur kelayakan, karena:
[[Kategori:ProyekWiki Perusahaan]]
* '''[[WP:KPC#A7]]''': tidak mengindikasikan kepentingan ([[WP:TOKOH|tokoh]], [[WP:ORG|organisasi]], [[WP:WEB|situs]]), atau
* '''[[WP:KPC#A9]]''': tidak mengindikasikan kepentingan (film, acara televisi, dan rekaman musik),
langsung berikan templat <code>{{tlp|hapus|A7}}</code> atau <code>{{tlp|hapus|A9}}</code>. Pengurus akan langsung menghapus artikel yang memenuhi [[WP:KPC|kriteria penghapusan cepat]].

Revisi per 13 Januari 2021 08.01

Halaman ini merupakan kebijakan resmi di Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia.
Isinya telah diterima luas oleh para pengguna dan dianggap sebagai standar yang normalnya harus diikuti oleh semua pengguna. Perubahan yang dibuat harus mendapatkan konsensus terlebih dahulu.
Pintasan
Kriteria kelayakan

Kriteria umum

Kriteria khusus

Tokoh
Geografi
Organisasi,
Perusahaan
Sekolah
Desa
Situs web
Film,
Acara televisi
Musik
Bahasa,
Dialek

Halaman ini berisi ketentuan yang dipakai untuk menentukan apakah suatu subyek layak atau tidak untuk dibuatkan artikelnya di dalam Wikipedia. Kebijakan ini mencakup semua kelompok orang yang berorganisasi untuk mencapai tujuan tertentu. Kebijakan ini mengatur organisasi komersial maupun non-komersial, antara lain, tapi tidak terbatas pada: perusahaan, organisasi, korporasi, institusi pendidikan, klub sosial, agama, sekte, perhimpunan, kemitraan, dan lain-lain.

Suatu subjek dianggap layak apabila memenuhi minimal satu kriteria di bawah. Apabila artikel tidak memenuhi satu pun kriteria yang disebutkan di bawah, maka artikel yang bersangkutan dapat dihapus baik secara langsung maupun melalui prosedur penghapusan. Jika hasil prosedur penghapusan menyatakan "diterima" maka artikel yang bersangkutan dinyatakan "layak".

Kebijakan ini juga berlaku kepada artikel-artikel yang dibuat sebelum kebijakan ini disetujui dan menggantikan "Wikipedia:Kelayakan artikel (perusahaan)".

Kriteria umum

Artikel yang memenuhi kriteria kelayakan
  1. "Pembahasan yang signifikan" berarti sumber membahas subjek secara langsung, mendetail, dan nontrivial.1
  2. "Sumber",2 didefinisikan dalam Wikipedia sebagai sumber sekunder, harus dapat memberikan bukti kelayakan yang objektif. Lebih dari satu sumber lebih baik.
  3. "Tepercaya" berarti sumber dapat digunakan untuk pemastian kelayakan, sesuai pedoman sumber tepercaya. Sumber berupa karya yang sudah dipublikasikan dalam bentuk media.
  4. "Independen terhadap subyek" berarti sumber yang dirujuk tidak boleh berasal dari pihak-pihak yang berafiliasi langsung dengan subjek, misalnya: promosi diri, iklan, autobiografi, dll.

Selain keempat kriteria umum di atas, sebuah perusahaan, organisasi, tim, agama, grup, dll, dianggap layak, apabila telah menjadi subyek pembahasan pada sumber sekunder, antara lain,

  • buku,
  • artikel koran,
  • film dokumenter, dan
  • laporan oleh organisasi pemerhati konsumen.

Sumber-sumber berikut tidak dapat dijadikan sebagai sumber artikel:

  • Rilis pers oleh subyek; otobiografi; iklan perusahaan, organisasi, maupun grup; dan karya lain di mana organisasi subyek membahas diri sendiri.
  • Karya yang membahas secara sambil lalu saja (trivial). Misalnya artikel koran yang hanya menyebut nama organisasi tanpa membahas, publikasi alamat dan nomer telepon, dan pencantuman pada direktori bisnis.

Bantulah Wikipedia dengan mencantumkan sumber tersebut di artikel. Wikipediawan lain mungkin tidak sempat mencari atau tidak memiliki akses ke sumber sekunder yang ada.

Kriteria khusus

Perusahaan

  • Tercantum dalam daftar perusahaan yang dikeluarkan oleh lembaga independen yang dikenal, misalnya Fortune 500, Forbes 500, atau daftar perusahaan besar yang dikeluarkan oleh pemerintah.
  • Pernah atau sedang diperdagangkan di suatu bursa efek.
  • Perusahaan telah mendapatkan penghargaan tingkat internasional atau nasional yang signifikan.

Organisasi

  • Cabang dari organisasi internasional atau nasional tidak layak untuk dibuatkan artikel tersendiri, kecuali apabila unsur kelayakan telah terpenuhi oleh pembahasan pada sumber sekunder.
  • Organisasi tingkat daerah tidak layak untuk dibuatkan artikel tersendiri, kecuali apabila unsur kelayakan telah terpenuhi oleh pembahasan pada sumber sekunder.

Larangan

  • Dilarang menyertakan visi dan misi dalam artikel yang Anda buat. Wikipedia adalah ensiklopedia, bukan halaman profil perusahaan/organisasi. Konten semacam ini bukan merupakan teks ensiklopedis (tidak ada satu pun ensiklopedia cetak yang menyertakan visi dan misi pada artikel bertopik perusahaan) serta dapat saja bersumber dari situs resmi perusahaan, yang dianggap tidak independen terhadap subjek (lihat pula Pranala luar), sehingga harus disembunyikan atau dihapus. Apabila kedapatan melakukan salin-dan-tempel dari situs web resmi perusahaan, akan disembunyikan atau dihapus karena plagiarisme adalah pelanggaran hak cipta. Silakan kembangkan sendiri dengan kalimat-kalimat lain yang lebih ensiklopedis.

Artikel yang tidak memenuhi

Apabila suatu artikel belum memperlihatkan unsur kelayakan, usahakan untuk memperbaikinya dengan cara:

  1. Perbaiki sendiri. Carilah referensi tepercaya dari internet atau media lain
  2. Gunakan templat {{subst:tak layak}}untuk menarik perhatian penyunting lain
  3. Gabungkan artikel kepada artikel lain yang cakupannya lebih luas
  4. Apabila belum berhasil ditemukan unsur kelayakan dua minggu setelah templat {{subst:tak layak}} diberikan, maka artikel tersebut akan segera dihapus.

Apabila suatu artikel jelas tidak memenuhi unsur kelayakan, karena:

langsung berikan templat {{hapus|A7}} atau {{hapus|A9}}. Pengurus akan langsung menghapus artikel yang memenuhi kriteria penghapusan cepat.

Diperoleh dari "https://wiki-indonesia.club/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Kelayakan_artikel/Organisasi_dan_perusahaan&oldid=17817164"