Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections

This guideline is a part of the English Wikipedia's Manual of Style.

It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: An article should not contain a list of miscellaneous information. It is better to present things in an organized way.

Avoid collections of miscellaneous facts or examples. Whether presented in list format or embedded in regular prose, these risk becoming trivia magnets, which grow increasingly unwieldy as items are added. If such a collection already exists,^[1] it should be considered temporary, until editors can sort out what is worth keeping; in some cases, it may be appropriate to move the content from the article itself to its talk page to allow this process to happen outside of mainspace. Content supported by a reliable source and which falls within the scope of Wikipedia could be integrated into a different section or article; non-encyclopedic content should simply be removed.

Not all list sections are trivia sections

In this guideline, the term "trivia section" refers to a section's content, not its name. A trivia section is one that contains a disorganized and unselective collection of facts or examples. A list with a relatively narrow theme is not necessarily trivia. For example, 1257 Samalas eruption contains a list of climate effects which that volcano eruption is believed to have had in different areas. In general, Wikipedia prefers prose, though a list format is sometimes the best way to present certain types of information.

Any list of examples should have a solid connection to the article's subject. When there are numerous potential examples, it is usually best to avoid creating an open-ended formatted list, as this often leads to indiscriminate additions. If the examples cannot be meaningfully limited, but a few would help illustrate a point, select two or three key examples and present them within the article's running prose. If examples would not be helpful to illustrate a point, avoid giving any; for instance, the "Akira slide" has been reenacted many times, but this can be mentioned without listing any actual recreations of it.^[2]

"In popular culture" and "Cultural references" material

Shortcuts

Cultural references about the article's subject should not be included merely because they exist. Cultural aspects of the subject should be included only if they are supported by reliable secondary or tertiary sources that discuss the subject's cultural impact in some depth. The mere appearance of the subject in a film, song, video game, television show, or the like is insufficient.

Example and discussion

If you want to add a fact to the banana article stating that bananas are used as weapons in the Worms video game series, you should cite a reliable source focused on bananas—such as, to take a fictitious example, The Cultural Impact of the Banana by Joe Bananalover. This ensures relevance to the subject of the article.

Citing sources specific to Worms, such as the games themselves as primary sources, or an article in PC Gamer magazine, is not sufficient. While these may verify the fact, they do not demonstrate the cultural significance of bananas in a manner proportionate to their overall treatment in reliable sources about bananas. It is the fact's relevance to the topic of bananas that matters, not its significance within the Worms games. Wikipedia's WP:PROPORTION policy requires articles to reflect the significance of aspects of a subject as presented in the broader body of literature on that subject. Minor aspects that do not receive significant attention in those sources should not be covered at all.

Of course, sources such as PC Gamer or the Worms games themselves may well be appropriate for including the fact in the Worms (series) article, where they are directly relevant to that article's subject.

This sourcing requirement is a minimum threshold for inclusion of cultural references. Consensus at the article level can determine whether particular references which meet this criteria should be included.

How to avoid a cultural list becoming a trivia magnet

Cultural references, such as for example all the film or TV adaptations of a true-life event, are sometimes grouped into a section labelled "In popular culture", "In the media", "Cultural references", "In fiction", etc. When not effectively curated, such a section can attract trivial references or otherwise expand in ways not compatible with Wikipedia policies such as what Wikipedia is not and neutral point of view. The risk can be reduced by ensuring that the list has clear, restrictive, and relevant criteria for inclusion, and that trivial entries are regularly cleared out. Sometimes, converting a list into regular prose can also discourage the addition of non-encyclopedic trivia.

A good "Cultural references" section might, for example, set out a logically-presented overview (chronological and/or by medium) of the way in which the subject has been documented, featured, and portrayed in different media and genres, for various purposes and audiences.

Other policies apply

Trivia sections found in places such as IMDb sometimes contain speculation, rumor, invented "facts", or even libel. However, Wikipedia articles must never contain such material. Sensational claims not supported by a high-quality source may be removed immediately, even if the section remains in place.

See also WP:No original research for why and how to avoid engaging in your own novel analysis of miscelleneous facts. See WP:Verifiability and WP:Identifying reliable sources for referencing standards. See WP:Neutral point of view for principles to apply in balancing Wikipedia treatment of cultural references to the subject.

Notes

^ In the early days of Wikipedia it was common for articles to include lists of miscellaneous information, often grouped into their own section. These sections were typically given names such as "Trivia", "Facts", "Miscellanea", or "Other information". For an example, see the John Lennon trivia section from December 10, 2005. This practice has long been disapproved.
^ As a demonstration, this old version of the "Akira slide" section in the Akira (1988 film) article contained a very lengthy list of examples, whereas this later version omits the list.

v t e Handling miscellaneous information
Policies and guidelines	Trivia sections Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
Essays	But for Napoleon, it was Tuesday Coatrack articles Discriminate vs indiscriminate information Example cruft Handling trivia "In popular culture" content Insignificant Listcruft Relevance of content
WikiProjects	Laundromat Popular culture Trivia Cleanup
About essays	Essay directory Avoid writing redundant essays Difference between policies, guidelines and essays Don't cite essays as if they were policy Quote your own essay Value of essays Wikipedia essays
Category