Talk:List of Elizabeth Warren 2020 presidential campaign endorsements

Inclusion criteria for endorsements

The following criteria are in effect for endorsements on this and similar lists.

There is consensus among participating editors that endorsements from an individual must meet all three of the following criteria for inclusion on a list of endorsements:

1. The endorser must have an article or be unquestionably entitled to one
2. This endorsement must be covered by reliable and independent sources
3. Coverage of the endorsement needs to use the word endorse, or other closely related synonym.

See WP:ENDORSERFC for details. - MrX 🖋 13:22, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Notability - Early States

Are there any objections to including mayors and senior party officials from the 4 early states if they don't have wikipedia pages? They seem notable enough in themselves, carrying extra weight due to being in the first four primaries (or, at least, Iowa).

- PutItOnAMapPutItOnAMap 🖋 17:55, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I object. We had a community wide RFC to set a bar for endorsements. Our goal is not to fill the article with volumes with minor, mind-numbing endorsements, but to document the important ones. Mayors are typically not notable. As far as party leaders, it depends. Can you demonstrate that the specific party leaders would be unquestionably entitled a wikipedia article based on sources about their lives (not just ephemera about their involvement with the DNC)? - MrX 🖋 22:56, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Sure. The charters and bylaws of the DNC stipulates that state party chairs will always be superdelegates at a Democratic National Convention. All former state party leaders are thus (at the very least) former DNC members.

As for less notable mayors and county party chairs, endorsements here roughly reflect the depth of a local party machine's support for a given candidate. This is especially relevant in early states where disproportionate investment builds significant ground games over time. I can see the case for rejecting people who aren't former or current state party leaders (e.g. no to county chairs and minor mayors) - i.e. that there's too much clutter. In that case, however, the number still displays useful information - so wouldn't it then be worthwhile to track them anyway with 'has endorsements from x number of county chairs in Iowa' (without specifically naming the people outside of a collapsible box), etc.? I feel this is still worth representing. - PutItOnAMapPutItOnAMap 23:27, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Are you claiming that we have a notability policy that says party leaders, at any level, are presumed notable? - MrX 🖋 15:57, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

The criteria as stated by the page you've linked which have actually been agreed upon are the following for individuals (rather than organisations) who've endorsed:

1. The endorser must have an article or be unquestionably entitled to one

2. This endorsement must be covered by reliable and independent sources

3. Coverage of the endorsement needs to use the word endorse, or other closely related synonym.

Part of the discussion itself stipulates that mayors of areas with >5000 are entitled. Wikipedia's criteria for entitlement to an article are as follows: the topic must have received significant coverage from independent, reliable sources (generally, but not always, enough to write more than paragraph's worth of information).

They are such that many of these county party chairs/most mayors in Iowa could (and indeed do!) meet them; they have significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. This is not necessarily true for councillors at all, but mayors tend to have the kind of larger profiles which generate this coverage, and so do most county party chairs because of their organising. It might not be true in e.g. Virginia, but it absolutely is in Iowa - they get more coverage to begin with *because* they're in Iowa.

If you'd like this to be proved or disproved on a case-by-case basis, I'd be happy to help. I'd struggle to think of a (former or current) state party chair who *wasn't* entitled to a wikipedia article. Just because they aren't made doesn't mean they shouldn't exist.

- PutItOnAMapPutItOnAMap 18:36, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

You are at least partly mistaken if you are suggesting that the inclusion criteria does not apply to organizations. The closer specifically noted: "For organizations (including the media) there is consensus for criteria 1 & criteria 3 and no consensus for criteria 2.". Also, criterion 1 was literally written as Criterion 1: Endorsements should be by notable people or organizations.

There was exactly one person in the RfC discussion who claimed "... this also applies generally to mayors of cites with population > 100,000 or perhaps > 5000". I would probably agree that mayors of cities with populations of more than 100,000 would be notable, but more than 5000? No way. Regardless, it does not represent a consensus view.

You can't just make a bare assertion that county chairs and mayors are notable. That principle either needs to be recorded in a Wikipedia guideline or you have to make the case for each individual by citing independent sources for that individual, just as if you were planning to WP:WTAF. Does that make sense? - MrX 🖋 14:44, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

You're right that more than few aren't particularly notable, so I've only added the ones with the relevant sourcing (not put in the article itself, but listed in the edits). I've also done this for similar endorsement articles. - PutItOnAMapPutItOnAMap 19:59, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Ashlee01.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tina Kotek photo.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)