Requirement for Notable Eligibility - Question 2

Question

Thank you to those who answered my question about the criteria for "Notable" eligibility. 

I have a second question about [[Kenyon-1950|Marquis L Kenyon]] who was a pivotal figure in the Butterfield Overland Mail.

There is a biographical sketch of him for state officers and members of the legislature of the state of New York, 1861, pages 213 and 214.

There are a few paragraphs about him on Wikipedia on the page about the Butterfield Overland Mail

Is this sufficient for notable eligibility?

Answer 1

Generally, if the person has a Wikipedia page or is listed in something like who's who, they are notable, but the lack of a Wiki page may just mean no one has written it yet. The fact that he was part of the Butterfield Overland Mail, I don't think qualifies him, but he was also a state legislature, and this would qualify as notable. In the Wikipedia criteria, anyone who was a member of a government, state or federal qualifies.

Wikipedia: "The following are presumed to be notable:

• Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. This also applies to people who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them."

Comments

Thank you. This helps with my dilemma of adding the sticker and whether to create a Wikipedia page for him. It would be my first so a bit apprehensive about doing so.

---

Since he does not have a Wikipedia page "in his name", to qualify him as a "State Legislator", he would need to have details about why he would be considered "Notable" for his work as a legislator. Just because they held office, doesn't mean they did something notable while in office. Nor does winning an election automatically qualify you as Notable. There needs to be something more substantial and warming a seat in a legislative body. If he had a Notable voting record, stood for particular issues, lobbied for change, or anything along those lines, then perhaps he could be qualified based on the actions he took while in office, but from what I've been able to gather about him, he had some actions here and some actions there, but nothing I've seen that stands out as of yet that's been brought to light. However, if someone were to build his profile to the extent that a Wikipedia page demonstrates, we could weight that against the standards and determine his Notable status.

---

I think that is to subjective and would differ in the eye of the beholder. I believe that the concept of notability is highly subjective and varies depending on individual perspectives. Attempting to quantify whether someone has achieved something 'notable' without established criteria is challenging. By accepting the presence of a Wikipedia page as a benchmark, we implicitly acknowledge its significance, though the real question should be whether the individual merits a Wikipedia page in the first place. According to Wikipedia's criteria for notability, individuals who have served in legislative bodies are deemed notable, reflecting the rarity of such experiences among Americans.

Consider the following Wikipedia pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Caulder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floyd_Sagely

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Bass

While these individuals are considered notable, their Wikipedia pages may lack detail. However, the focus should be on whether they meet the established standards for notability.

It appears that we are sending mixed messages to users on this matter. The priority should not be who is first (has Wikipedia done it), but rather whether individuals meet certain criteria to warrant notability. While compliance with Wikipedia standards and having a Wikipedia page generally indicates notability, waiting for someone else to establish this precedent risks overlooking minorities, women, and other less recognized groups.

---

I am aware that Wikipedia contains pages that have very little content. If you are a part of the Wikipedia team, you would also be aware that these pages are regularly reviewed, critiqued, and occasionally removed due to the lack of content. We attempt to monitor such changes, but since we are not directly partnered with them, it is difficult to note when pages are removed until typically long after the fact.

However, from those you cite, you imply that we should aspire to the lowest common denominator as it relates to holding to a Wikipedia page that may end up on the chopping block. What we do here is what WikiTree has always done - attempt to properly document a profile so that all who view the profile can agree that it meets or exceeds the standards. Wikipedia and WikiTree both agree on basic principles. Sources. Content. Standards. There has to be documented evidence of notability. The biography must cite the items of notability. And it must meet the standards of notability. If, as with Wikipedia, a few years later neither you nor I are here to defend such a profile, and a new team comes in and asks "why was this Notable?", then I would hope that our goal would be that it would have at least a reasonable defense to present and would not be swept away.

I would also argue that unfortunately, election to a legislative body at the state level in the United States is not a high bar, as there are at least tens of thousands who meet that criteria, although if Wikipedia acknowledges it, I will not argue in that respect. My feeling is we should operate within the standards we've agreed to, and if we disagree with those, then operate to change them. However, their standards also acknowledge the items mentioned above. Sources. Content. Standards. And those are absolutely needed. While it is tempting to claim that the little old lady down the street who always opened the library on time and was friendly to everyone who she met was notable in their eyes, we do have to draw the line somewhere, or else everyone is notable, and by that principle, no one is Notable. But I believe we should aspire to higher standards where we can, prove as much as we can, and when others attempt to understand why we made our decisions, then they will stand on their own merit.

---

Scott, 

I find your reply helpful. I think my next course of action is to do additional research on him. I noticed a source on the Wikipedia page for his obituary, Utica Daily Observer (New York), The Late Hon. M. L. Kinyon (sic), April 3, 1862. I don't believe that I have seen this. I'm hoping it provide more information on his role.

To your point, more research and more sources to see if a solid case can be made. 

Answer 2

If a person has a Wikipedia entry (no matter in which language, could be Navajo or Guaraní), they are eligible for the {{Notables Sticker}}

Comments

The one concern I have is that he does not have a Wikipedia page "in his name". The page that has been cited is for the "Butterfield Overland Mail" stagecoach line. He happens to have been involved in that venture, but there is no page on him specifically. Essentially he is named on the page, and some of his actions related to the company are described on the page - but the page is not about him. So under such conditions, he would not be a Notable based solely on the Wikipedia page that only has a small amount of information about him.

---

Doesn't the Notables Project state that the person only needs to qualify for a Wikipedia page?  When they have one, it is a "no-brainer" even for people who do not actually qualify under Wikipedia's stated criteria yet have a page anyway.

---

They need to "demonstrate" that they qualify for a Wikipedia page. It's not that they can simply "claim" it qualifies. The standards are fairly high. At a bare minimum, 3 highly independent and reliable sources that demonstrate the feats for which the individual is Notable. Clear biographical evidence on the profile indicating why the person should be considered Notable. Clear evidence of what puts that individual above their peers who are not considered Notable. There needs to be more than "I think they're Notable". Since there's no Wikipedia page, the bar is set in a way that the WikiTree page should represent at least the level we see in a Wikipedia page so that others can look and agree that it truly represents what one should expect of a Notable person, or of a person represented on Wikipedia.