Wikipedia : run - of - the - mill - Wikipedia Wikipedia : run - of - the - mill `` WP : MILL '' redirects here. For the Wikiproject covering windmills, watermills etc., see WP : MILLS. `` WP : COOKIE '' redirects here. For for HTTP cookie issues on Wikipedia, see WP : COOKIES. For WikiLove cookie templates, see Wikipedia : WikiLove. This page is an essay on notability. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not one of Wikipedia 's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms ; others only represent minority viewpoints. Shortcuts WP : MILL WP : ROTM WP : COOKIE WP : COOKIECUTTER This page in a nutshell : There are some items that are very commonplace for which sources verifying their existence do exist. But there are so many of these that can be verified given the same sources, there should n't be an article on each one, and only those with additional sources deserve articles. It is not practical to have an article on each of these identical - looking cookie cutter homes Something that is run - of - the - mill is a common, everyday, ordinary item that does not stand out from the rest. Something or someone that is `` run - of - the - mill '' is probably not notable. The phrase `` run of the mill '' appears to have originated from early factory quality control and described work that had not been graded and was therefore unlikely to be either exceptionally good or exceptionally bad. There are many subjects for which reliable sources independent of the subject exist. One may assume on this basis that they are notable. There are just so many of these things in the world, which are so commonplace that if an article on each were to be created, there would be so many articles on these alone, possibly more than there are total Wikipedia articles to this day and Wikipedia would be clogged with them, in the sense that it would be harder to structure content and it would make it hard to find notable material. A street map shows every street within a city, down to every cul - de-sac with just four houses. Every city has several detailed street maps that have been published. In one square mile of an urban area, there are hundreds, even thousands of streets and there can be hundreds of square miles within a city and its suburbs. It is not practical to create an article on every street as the high volume might overwhelm the capacity of editors to maintain them. Almost every city has police and fire departments. These departments can be so busy that they are mentioned almost daily in the local news but again, they are just ordinary police and fire departments doing their jobs. Many people have one or more obituaries published detailing the fact that they died, information regarding their deaths and often information about their families and lives. This information is published in a newspaper, a reliable source. But in a single major city, there will be dozens of obituaries published each day. For such a commonplace item to be worthy for inclusion in an article, there must be sources provided other than those that would source so many others just like it. This shows that there is also something unusual, something unique about that subject so that the article is not just blank is blank ( which would essentially be a dictionary entry ) and that it does not resemble hundreds of other articles by containing mostly the same words with a few fill - in - the - blanks. Once such notability has been established, the common sources ( e.g. a map for a street ) can then be used to verify the accuracy of information. Contents 1 Examples of items or subjects 1.1 Residential 1.2 Commercial 1.3 Sports 2 What not to create 3 Dealing with a run - of - the - mill article 4 See also 5 References Examples of items or subjects This strip mall is probably important to the nearby residents, and it is probably mentioned in a number of local newspapers and newsletters. But this does n't make it notable. Some subjects in particular are extremely commonplace. This does not mean they are never notable. But it is surely not possible for all of them to be. Residential Nearly every house is listed in some directory identifying the company that built it and the people who live in it. This does not make it notable. There is a right to privacy when it comes to writing about a residence. Articles can be created on historic houses that a notable person has lived in or that are notable for another reason. Apartment complexes, housing developments and trailer parks, even though there may be websites about each one and even though they are often displayed on maps, are not notable on this basis. Commercial Shopping centers, strip malls, office buildings, business or industrial parks or medical centers may have a lot of information from reliable sources giving them bare mention. In every city and town are single location businesses ( e.g. retail, restaurant, gas station, auto repair shop, motel ) and in some places, most businesses fit this description. Yet they may be mentioned in reliable sources. Sports It has already been accepted that professional athletes, regardless of their accomplishments in their field, may receive coverage. Local newspapers also cover high school and college athletes, in every city and town, there are several high schools and colleges and papers that cover them ; inevitably, these athletes will receive coverage. In professional sports, each game will receive deep coverage from the local papers of the team 's city and at minimum, a box score from papers elsewhere. Each professional sports league has plenty of teams ( some have more than 30 ) and a sports season has many games ( Major League Baseball has 162 per season ). It is not practical to have an article on every game ever played. Imagine an article on `` July 8 Cardinals vs. Brewers game '' and `` July 9 Cardinals vs. Brewers game '' and `` July 11 Cardinals vs. Cubs game '' and so on. More encyclopedic would be articles like 2009 St. Louis Cardinals season, which describe the highlights of the season. What not to create Some articles not to create based on common sources only are : A restaurant that has been given reviews in the local papers A local club supporting a hobby or interest, or a local organization promoting some cause Regular - season games in a professional sport ( A post-season series should be in an article about the series rather than in articles about individual games ) The local festival or other scheduled event that occurs annually A bank that has been mentioned in the news each of the 5 times it has been robbed in its 30 - year existence The side street where once every few years, a news - reported crime has occurred An ordinary political rally or candidate announcement or press conference A lawyer who provides legal commentary for a local television or radio station Dealing with a run - of - the - mill article First, make sure the article is on a run - of - the - mill subject : Does the written text seem to imply there is something unusual about the subject or something that may be encyclopedic ? Just because something belongs to a category that might often be run - of - the - mill does n't mean that the example is. Examine the reference, sources and external links provided. Do they meet WP : RS guidelines ? Do they come from international, national or local sources ? Is the topic one that is normally accepted by Wikipedia 's guidelines ? If, after this review, you feel the article is, indeed, run - of - the - mill, you may take action. Consider if any appropriate tags may be placed on top of the page in lieu of immediate deletion that may encourage others to improve the article. A suggested merge is sometimes an option. Blatant spam, advertising, and self - promotion shall be speedy - deleted, marked with ( ( db - spam ) ). If the item ( other than a person, business or organization ) is a part of something larger, it may be merged or redirected to that page. If something is truly not notable or is likely not to be considered notable, it may be nominated for deletion. This will give others a chance to discuss if it may be worth deleting the information. You may also start by using the ( ( prod ) ) tag to see if the deletion is challenged by someone else. See also Wikipedia : Businesses with a single location Wikipedia is not a directory Wikipedia : Every snowflake is unique Wikipedia : Inherent notability Wikipedia : Articles for deletion / Common outcomes References Jump up ^ Cresswell, Julia ( 2010 ). Oxford Dictionary of Word Origins. New York : Oxford University Press. p. 375. ISBN 9780199547937. Essays about Wikipedia Essays on building, editing, and deleting content Philosophy Articles must be written Avoid vague introductions Be a reliable source Cohesion Concede lost arguments Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia Do n't lie Explanationism External criticism of Wikipedia Here to build an encyclopedia Most ideas are bad Need Neutrality of sources Not editing because of Wikipedia restriction Oversimplification Paradoxes Paraphrasing POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields Product, process, policy Purpose Systemic bias There is no seniority Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia Tendentious editing The role of policies in collaborative anarchy The rules are principles Trifecta Wikipedia in brief Wikipedia is an encyclopedia Wikipedia is a community Construction 100K featured articles Acronym overkill Advanced source searching Adding images improves the encyclopedia Advanced article editing Advanced table formatting Advanced template coding Advanced text formatting Alternatives to the `` Expand '' template Amnesia test A navbox on every page An unfinished house is a real problem Articles have a half - life Autosizing images Avoid mission statements Bare URLs Be neutral in form Beef up that first revision Blind men and an elephant Cherrypicking Children 's lit, adult new readers, & large - print books Citation overkill Citation underkill Concept cloud Creating controversial content Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability Dictionaries as sources Do n't demolish the house while it 's still being built Do n't hope the house will build itself Do n't panic Editing on mobile devices Editors are not mindreaders Endorsements ( commercial ) Featured articles may have problems Fruit of the poisonous tree Give an article a chance Ignore STRONGNAT for date formats Inaccuracy Introduction to structurism Law sources Link rot Mine a source Merge Test Minors and persons judged incompetent `` Murder of '' articles Not every story / event / disaster needs a biography Not everything needs a navbox Nothing is in stone Organizing disambiguation pages by subject area Permastub Potential, not just current state Printability Pruning article revisions Publicists Put a little effort into it Restoring part of a reverted edit Robotic editing Sham consensus Run an edit - a-thon Temporary versions of articles There is a deadline There is no deadline The deadline is now Walled garden What an article should not include Wikipedia is a work in progress Wikipedia is not a reliable source Wikipedia is not being written in an organized fashion The world will not end tomorrow Write the article first Writing better articles Deletion Adjectives in your recommendations AfD is not a war zone Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions Arguments to make in deletion discussions Avoid repeated arguments Before commenting in a deletion discussion But there must be sources ! Confusing arguments mean nothing Content removal Counting and sorting are not original research Delete the junk Does deletion help ? Do n't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument Follow the leader How to save an article proposed for deletion I just do n't like it Immunity Liar Liar Pants on Fire Nothing Overzealous deletion Relisting can be abusive Relist bias Salami tactics The Heymann Standard Unopposed AFD discussion Wikipedia is not Whack - A-Mole Why was the page I created deleted ? What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion When in doubt, hide it in the woodwork No Encyclopedic Use Essays on civility The basics How to be civil Compromise Accepting other users Enjoy yourself Expect no thanks Thank you Apologizing Truce Divisiveness Encouraging newcomers Relationships with academic editors High - functioning autism and Asperger 's editors Obsessive Compulsive Disorder editors Philosophy A weak personal attack is still wrong Advice for hotheads An uncivil environment is a poor environment Be the glue Civility warnings Deletion as revenge Failure Forgive and forget It 's not the end of the world Nobody cares Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals Old Fashioned Wikipedian Values Staying cool when the editing gets hot The grey zone The last word There is no Divine Right Of Editors Most ideas are bad Nothing is clear The rules of polite discourse There is no common sense Wikipedia is not about winning Writing for the opponent Dos Argue better Assume good faith Assume the assumption of good faith Assume no clue Avoid personal remarks Avoid the word `` vandal '' Beyond civility Call a spade a spade Candor Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass Deny recognition Encourage full discussions Get over it How to lose Just drop it Keep it down to earth Mind your own business Don'ts Do n't give a fuck Do n't be inconsiderate Do n't be rude Do n't call a spade a spade Do n't call the kettle black Do n't take the bait Do not insult the vandals Do n't come down like a ton of bricks Do n't be ashamed Do n't drink the consensus Kool - Aid Do n't spite your face Do n't call things cruft No angry mastodons Do n't act like an oracle No, you ca n't have a pony Do n't be an ostrich Do n't template the regulars Do n't be a fanatic Do n't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack Do n't fight fire with fire Do n't be prejudiced Do n't remind others of past misdeeds Do n't throw your toys out of the pram Do n't help too much Passive aggression Do n't cry COI Do n't be obnoxious Do n't be a WikiBigot Do n't confuse stub status with non-notability Do n't eat the troll 's food You ca n't squeeze blood from a turnip Wiki relations WikiLove WikiHate WikiCrime WikiBullying WikiPeace WikiLawyering WikiHarassment POV Railroading Essays on notability Notability Alternative outlets Articles with a single source Bare notability Bombardment Businesses with a single location But it 's true ! Citation overkill Clones Coatrack articles Common sourcing mistakes Discriminate vs indiscriminate information Every snowflake is unique Existence ≠ Notability Fart Google searches and numbers High Schools Inclusion is not an indicator of notability Inherent notability Insignificant Masking the lack of notability Make stubs News coverage does not decrease notability No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability No big loss No one cares about your garage band No one really cares Notability / Historical / Arguments Notability can not be purchased Notability is not a level playing field Notability is not a matter of opinion Notability is not relevance or reliability Notability means impact Notability points Notability sub-pages Obscurity ≠ Lack of notability Offline sources One hundred words One sentence does not an article make Other stuff exists Pokémon test Read the source Run - of - the - mill Significant coverage not required Solutions are mixtures and nothing else Subjective importance What notability is not What is and is not routine coverage What to include Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause General notability guideline Independent sources Significant coverage Trivial mentions Humorous essays Humorous material Anti-Wikipedian Assume bad faith Assume faith Assume good wraith Assume stupidity Assume that everyone 's assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming good faith Avoid using preview button Avoid using wikilinks BOLD, revert, revert, revert Boston Tea Party Barnstaritis Do n't - give - a-fuckism Edits Per Day Editsummarisis Go ahead, vandalize How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb ? How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angle Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them LTTAUTMAOK No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider - Man Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you Please bite the newbies R-e-s-p-e-c-t Shadowless Fists of Death ! The Night After Wikimas The first rule of Wikipedia The Five Pillars of Untruth Things that should not be surprising The WikiBible Watchlistitis Why not create an Account ? Inactive historical references Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Unblock Emails About essays About essays Essay guide Value of essays Difference between policies, guidelines and essays Do n't cite essays as if they were policy Avoid writing redundant essays Finding an essay Quote your own essay Policies and guidelines About policies and guidelines Policies Guidelines How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance Policy writing is hard Retrieved from `` https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill&oldid=824190214 '' Categories : Wikipedia essays Wikipedia essays on notability Wikipedia essays on building the encyclopedia Talk Project page Talk Contents About Wikipedia Edit links This page was last edited on 5 February 2018, at 21 : 25. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution - ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia ® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. About Wikipedia

Question: where does run of the mill come from
Answer: early factory quality control