User:LoveElectronicLiterature/Notability (ELIT)

This page is designed to provide criteria for notability within the field of electronic literature.

Revised from Wikipedia:Notability_(books) to reflect the particular issues and concerns for electronic literature.

This page in a nutshell: A work of electronic literature is presumed notable, and to generally merit an article, if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria:

The work of electronic literature (work) has been the subject of two or more sources as defined below in lists of references.^[1] published works appearing in sources that are independent of the work itself.^[2] This can include electronic works in all forms and on all platforms. ^[3] and reviews. ^[4]
The work has won a major literary award, for example the New Media Prize or an award from the Electronic Literature Organization.
The work has been presented in a notable institution (for example, the Library of Congress, the British Museum). As electronic literature is global, notability for an institution does not depend on having an article about that institution in Wikipedia. (for example LAMI in Lima Peru)
The work has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to any of the sciences, humanities or arts, or to a notable or significant motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement.
The work is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools,^[5] colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.^[6]

This guideline provides some additional criteria for use in deciding whether a work should or should not have an article on Wikipedia. Satisfying this notability guideline generally indicates a work warrants an article.

Procedures

Works of electronic literature

The Wikipage, Wikipedia:Notability_(books) provides procedures and instructions for noting whether an article about an electronic literature work should be developed as notable or an existing article should be flagged as not notable. Please follow these conventions (or note exceptions here).

Exceptions

Plot summaries: Electronic literature, by its very nature, will have multiple readings, multiple endings, etc. Summarize the work using secondary sources as much as possible. Note that there will be conflicting plot summaries. However, the article about the work should not solely be a description of the plot. Include technology, readin strategies, etc. Some description of the work from the Wikipedian's experience with the work may be allowable; however, the majority of the summary article should be from secondary sources.
Self-publication: Works of electronic literature are often published on the web by the author since the traditional publishing system has not catered for digital and interactive works.^[7] Notability for works of electronic literature is therefore not dependent on how the work was published. In addition, it might be useful to provide visitation counts to both websites and individual works. These stats can be obtained via Google Analytics or services such as Statcounter.com.

People

Follow the standards for Wikipedia:Notability (people). However, notability within the electronic literature community may also include a substantial contribution to the field of electronic literature. Awards for people such as the annual Electronic Literature Awards may be sufficient for notability. https://eliterature.org/elo-awards/

Issues for electronic literature

Notability criteria is an endemic problem in interactive fiction, video games, electronic literature, etc. These have different standards and reviews than those available for traditional literature. By nature, they are transient.

Suggested notable sources

Please add sources here with a URL and justification as a notable source.

Awards

Works that win the following awards are presumed notable. However, for an article about a work to be verifiable, at least one reliable and independent source must exist that describes the work. (Would the description in the NEXT Museum, Archive, and Preservation Space count as that independent source? Should we be listing those sources or leave it open?)

New Media Writing Prize
Electronic Literature Organization#Awards
Woollahra Digital Literary Award, an annual award in support of Australian digital literature and publishing<ref>"Woollahra Digital Literary Award". Woollahra Municipal Council. Retrieved 20 November 2023.</ref
Opening Up Digital Writing Prize (2017, 2018)
Digital Humanities Awards (Highlighting Resources in Digital Humanities): http://dhawards.org/
The London International Creative Competition: https://licc.uk/

Publishers and collections

The following publishers, journals, collections, and series are recognized as selective.

The Electronic Literature Collection
Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy (ISSN 1521-2300)
voidspace https://voidspacezine.com/
The Journal of Interactive Narrative (ISSN 2998-7814) https://journal.ardin.online/index.php/jin
Electronic Literature Organization and collections
The NEXT Museum
Eastgate Systems publications
Archivio di Nuova Scrittura
The New Review https://thenewriverjournal.org/

Databases

ELMCIP is an authorized database for Wikipedia. https://www.elmcip.it/ (Should we list others, such as the Consortium on Electronic Literature (CELL) Project or just authorized databases? And would being in the database be a criteria for notability?)

Reviews

Reviews of electronic literature are often found in the following journals:

Electronic Book Review, This is one of the earliest and most prominent journals in the field. It contains both peer-reviewed and editorial content, each of which is clearly marked.
I Love Epoetry. (just got resurrected!) https://iloveepoetry.org/
Digital Review https://thedigitalreview.com/
Reviews in Digital Humanities https://reviewsindh.pubpub.org/
Interactive Fiction Database https://ifdb.org/
Text Matters: A Journal of Literature, Theory and Culture https://czasopisma.uni.lodz.pl/textmatters
Digital Humanities Quarterly, https://dhq.digitalhumanities.org/submissions/index.html

Under discussion

Youtube and other resources. For example, traversals and presentations that are held on YouTube should be admitted due to their content and venue. See Lyle Skains awards for the Opening Up Digital Fiction writing competition in 2017 - 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8ingEfwLYkc See: Wikipedia talk:Notability (ELIT)#Oral sources?

Footnotes

↑ The "subject" of a work means non-trivial treatment and excludes a mere listing. An analysis of the manner of treatment is crucial as well; Interactive Fiction Database IFDB.org for example is reliable, but postings to that site by members of the public on a subject do not share the site's imprimatur. Be careful to check that the creators of a particular electronic literature work are in no way interested in any third-party source.
↑ Independent does not mean independent of academic or reviewing institutions, but only refers to those actually involved with the particular work.
↑ A work's inclusion in a conference or "best read" or syllabi is non-trivial treatment if the list is published by a notable university or from a notable conference. Social media review sites like Goodreads and LibraryThing may qualify for this criterion, if the reviewer site is from a notable academic or reviewer within the field
↑ While many notable electronic literature works are published on the creator's site, other citations must be used. Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article. The published works must include references and citations for someone else writing about the work. (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). The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its creators) have actually considered the work notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial reviews, articles, and analyses that focus upon the electronic literature work.
↑ This includes both primary and secondary schools.
↑ This criterion does not include textbooks or reference books written specifically for study in educational programs, but only independent works deemed sufficiently significant to be the subject of study themselves, such as major works in philosophy, literature, or science.
↑ O’Sullivan, James (2021). "Publishing electronic literature". In O'Sullivan, James; Grigar, Dene (eds.). Electronic Literature as Digital Humanities: Contexts, Forms, & Practices (1 ed.). Bloomsbury Publishing Inc. doi:10.5040/9781501363474.ch-022. ISBN 978-1-5013-6347-4.

[subject-1] The "subject" of a work means non-trivial treatment and excludes a mere listing. An analysis of the manner of treatment is crucial as well; Interactive Fiction Database IFDB.org for example is reliable, but postings to that site by members of the public on a subject do not share the site's imprimatur. Be careful to check that the creators of a particular electronic literature work are in no way interested in any third-party source.

[independent-2] Independent does not mean independent of academic or reviewing institutions, but only refers to those actually involved with the particular work.

[conference-3] A work's inclusion in a conference or "best read" or syllabi is non-trivial treatment if the list is published by a notable university or from a notable conference. Social media review sites like Goodreads and LibraryThing may qualify for this criterion, if the reviewer site is from a notable academic or reviewer within the field

[selfpromotion-4] While many notable electronic literature works are published on the creator's site, other citations must be used. Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopedia article. The published works must include references and citations for someone else writing about the work. (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). The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its creators) have actually considered the work notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial reviews, articles, and analyses that focus upon the electronic literature work.

[school-5] This includes both primary and secondary schools.

[textbooks-6] This criterion does not include textbooks or reference books written specifically for study in educational programs, but only independent works deemed sufficiently significant to be the subject of study themselves, such as major works in philosophy, literature, or science.

[7] O’Sullivan, James (2021). "Publishing electronic literature". In O'Sullivan, James; Grigar, Dene (eds.). Electronic Literature as Digital Humanities: Contexts, Forms, & Practices (1 ed.). Bloomsbury Publishing Inc. doi:10.5040/9781501363474.ch-022. ISBN 978-1-5013-6347-4.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

This page was redesigned at the edge.

A page that knows where it met you.