Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Avoid creating lists of miscellaneous information. It was once common practice on Wikipedia for articles to include lists of isolated information, which were often grouped into their own section. These sections were typically given names such as "Trivia", "Facts", "Miscellanea", "Other information" and "Notes" (not to be confused with "Notes" sections that store

reference citation footnotes). For an example of this practice, see the John Lennon trivia section
from December 10, 2005.

Trivia sections should be avoided. A list of arbitrary points risks becoming a trivia magnet, which grows increasingly unwieldy as things are added on. If such a list already exists, it should be considered temporary, until editors can sort out what is worth keeping. Content supported by a

prose
in another section or article. Non-encyclopedic content should be removed. Otherwise valid content should ultimately be removed if there isn't a good place for it.

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" list. However, a selectively populated list with a relatively narrow theme is not necessarily trivia, and can be the best way to present some types of information. For example, 1257 Samalas eruption contains a list of climate effects which that volcano eruption is believed to have had in different areas.

Other policies apply

Trivia sections found in places such as

libel
. However, Wikipedia articles must not contain those, in a trivia section or anywhere else. Sensational claims not supported by a valid source may be removed immediately, even if the section remains in place.

Cultural references about a subject should not be included simply because they exist. A Wikipedia article may include a subject's cultural impact by

reliable secondary or tertiary sources
(e.g., a dictionary or encyclopedia). A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, video game, television show, or other cultural item.

Articles often include material about cultural references to the subject of the article. Sometimes this content is in its own section ("in popular culture" is common, but also "in the media", "cultural references", "in fiction" etc.), and sometimes it is included with other prose. When not effectively curated, such material can attract trivial references or otherwise expand in ways not compatible with Wikipedia policies such as

neutral point of view
.

As with most article content, prose is usually preferable to a list format, regardless of where the material appears. Such prose might give a logically presented overview (chronological and/or by medium) of how the subject has been documented, featured, and portrayed in different media and genres, for various purposes and audiences.

Take for example the subject of

Bon Appetit magazine, which is a reliable source for articles about soup. If Bon Appetit mentions how Baby Yoda drank bone broth, it may be suitable for inclusion in the bone broth article. By contrast, an article in Polygon
reviewing the latest episode of The Mandalorian which does not go into any detail about bone broth but simply mentions that Baby Yoda drank some in that episode is not sufficient to include in the article because it does not provide any in-depth coverage of the subject of the article.

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.

Other guidance: See

for principles to apply in balancing Wikipedia treatment of cultural references to the subject.

See also