Wikipedia:Notability of Local Government Officials

This is an essay on notability.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it 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.

This page in a nutshell: An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable. If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it.

This page is to help determine whether a person who is or has been a local government official is a valid subject for a separate Wikipedia article dedicated solely to individual.

Decisions based on verifiable evidence[edit]

Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." Wikipedia bases its decision about whether an organization is notable enough to justify a separate article on the verifiable evidence that the organization or product has attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product. Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published—even if these sources are not actually listed in the article yet (though in most cases it probably would improve the article to add them).

No inherent notability[edit]

No company or organization is considered inherently notable. No organization is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of organization it is, including schools.^[1] If the individual organization has received no or very little notice from independent sources, then it is not notable simply because other individual organizations of its type are commonly notable or merely because it exists (see "If it's not notable", below). "Notability" is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance." No matter how "important" editors may personally believe an organization to be, it should not have a stand-alone article in Wikipedia unless reliable sources independent of the organization have discussed it.

When evaluating the notability of organizations or products, please consider whether they have had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education. Large organizations and their products are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability. However, smaller organizations and their products can be notable, just as individuals can be notable. Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations or their products, though articles about very small "garage" or local companies are typically unacceptable per WP:NOTADVERTISING.

No inherited notability[edit]

An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it. A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries. The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable. Examples: If a notable person buys a restaurant, the restaurant does not "inherit" notability from its owner. If a notable person joins an organization, the organization does not "inherit" notability from its member.

This works the other way as well. An organization may be notable, but individual members (or groups of members) do not "inherit" notability due to their membership. A corporation may be notable, but its subsidiaries do not "inherit" notability from being owned by the corporation.

Primary criteria[edit]

An official related to local government is notable if they have been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. A single independent source is almost never sufficient for demonstrating the notability of an organization.

Depth of coverage[edit]

The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple^[2] independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability.

Deep coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond routine announcements and makes it possible to write more than a very brief, incomplete stub about an organization. Acceptable sources under this criterion include all types of reliable sources except works carrying merely trivial coverage, such as:

sources that simply report meeting times, shopping hours or event schedules,
the publications of telephone numbers, addresses, and directions in business directories,
inclusion in lists of similar organizations,^[3]
the season schedule or final score from sporting events,
routine communiqués announcing such matters as the hiring or departure of personnel,
brief announcements of mergers or sales of part of the business,
simple statements that a product line is being sold, changed, or discontinued,
routine notices of facility openings or closings (e.g., closure for a holiday or the end of the regular season),
routine notices of the opening or closing of local branches, franchises, or shops,
routine restaurant reviews,
quotations from an organization's personnel as story sources, or
passing mention, such as identifying a quoted person as working for an organization.

Audience[edit]

The source's audience must also be considered. Evidence of significant coverage by international or national, or possibly regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one prominent regional, national, or international source is necessary.

Independence of sources[edit]

A primary test of notability is whether people independent of the topic itself have actually considered the official notable enough beyond their official capacity that they have written and published non-trivial, non-routine works that focus upon them.

Sources used to support a claim of notability include independent, reliable publications in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations<ref name=fourexamples>Examples:

press releases, press kits, or similar works;
any material which is substantially based on a press release;
self-published materials;
any material written by the government, political party, or sources closely associated with them;
advertising and campaign materials by, about, or on behalf of the individual;
professional websites or other websites written, published, or controlled by the individual;
any material written or published by the individual's organization, directly or indirectly;
works about featured school alumni
other works solely in which the individual talks about themeslf regardless of the source of publication.

Self-promotion is not a route to qualifying for an encyclopaedia article. Qualifying published works must be someone else writing about the person/topic.

Once notability is established, primary sources and self-published sources may be used 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.

Alternate criteria for certain government officials[edit]

The following sections discuss alternate methods for establishing notability in cases where the official in question is in charge of a city or municipality with a population of more than 100,000. No individual is considered notable except to the extent that independent sources demonstrate that it has been noticed by people not associated with that person. 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 politician specific notability criteria, or
the general notability guideline

and they comply with the policy Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, especially with regards to avoiding indiscriminate inclusion of information.

Officials in charge of large municipality departments[edit]

Individuals in charge of government major departments (Transportation, Police, Education, Fire, etc.) that oversee populations of 100,000 people or more are generally considered notable, but notability is not automatic in this (or any other) case. However, sufficient independent sources almost always exist for such individuals, so that notability can be established using the any criteria discussed above. This includes officials that are elected, appointed, or hired.

As part of the WP:BEFORE process, users who would are considering nominating these articles for deletion should search for prominent coverage prior to nominating for deletion, given the very high (albeit uncertain) chance that the individual is notable enough to warrant their own article.

Leaders of prolific cities[edit]

Included additionally to the select criteria are the elected leaders of internationally recognized, capital, or otherwise important cities (similar to above). Cities of this nature include the City of London(historic and traditional importance), Palmyra (world cultural importance), Burlington, Vermont (regional importance), Andorra la Vella (national importance), Bethlehem (religious importance), and several others. Individuals occupying leadership positions in cities of such as those prescribed are most likely to find themselves being covered in national or international media and thus most likely worthy of their own articles.

Notes[edit]

^ But see also WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, especially for universities
^ "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 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).
^ Inclusion in "best of", "top 100", and similar lists does not count towards notability at all, unless the list itself is notable, such as the Fortune 500 and the Michelin Guide. Inclusion in a notable list counts like any other reliable source, but it does not exempt the article from the normal value of providing evidence that independent sources discuss the subject.

[1] But see also WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES, especially for universities

[Multiple-2] "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 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).

[3] Inclusion in "best of", "top 100", and similar lists does not count towards notability at all, unless the list itself is notable, such as the Fortune 500 and the Michelin Guide. Inclusion in a notable list counts like any other reliable source, but it does not exempt the article from the normal value of providing evidence that independent sources discuss the subject.

[1]

[2]

[3]