Wikipedia talk:Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article

This page was nominated for deletion on 28 May 2020. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Donald Trump, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Donald Trump on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Donald TrumpWikipedia:WikiProject Donald TrumpTemplate:WikiProject Donald TrumpDonald Trump articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Requested move 21 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to WP:Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article. (closed by non-admin page mover) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:TRUMPHATE → Wikipedia:Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article – The current title isn't very descriptive and doesn't tell you what the essay is about. It would be fine as a shortcut, but is confusing as an actual page title. IagoQnsi (talk) 06:09, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If this is supposed to be about any current president in general, rather than this current president specifically, then it should reflect that. This seems more along the lines of Wikipedia:President Derangement Syndrome. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 08:46, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How about Wikipedia:Not every tweet deserves an article? The propensity for Wikipedia editors to follow the hourly hatemob trending topics is certainly mock-worthy. -- Netoholic @ 10:47, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Any of these suggestions is fine and I've no problem with someone expanding on the general spirit of the essay or moving it.--v/r - T P 15:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support expanding the essay. A lot of us have had enough of Trump, and his various failures have been widely documented elsewhere. How about creating a page that lists the most meme-worthy Trump moments? LSGH (talk) (contributions) 16:55, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@LSGH:I don't know that you quite grasp the point of this essay? You do understand it is saying WP is not a repository of every pretzel-choking (or 57-states) moment of any president's term, right? To clarify: It's basically saying we're an encyclopedia and not a meme-farm. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 17:40, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. The essay should say that we do not need those kinds of lists and other irrelevant material. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 01:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy and let original creator title it whatever they like, as this doesn't appear to be an essay worthy of being in the Wikipedia namespace. If kept in WP namespace, sure, support move as second choice though. SnowFire (talk) 16:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The proposed title is more accurate. It could easily be referred to as WP:TRUMPNOT, thus avoiding a charged redirect which would likely get misread, and better follow our article naming scheme. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:36, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually pretty good, I like that.--v/r - T P 01:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support move and expand. I like the proposed title, dislike the current one, and am open to other suggestions. The topic is a very good point worthy of an essay rather than just a user essay. I look forward to seeing it grow, and seeing the Wikipedia community guard against it becoming attack or advocacy. The point of any essay is to help others to understand and improve Wikipedia, and I think it does that and can do it better. Andrewa (talk) 22:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nutshell

@Soumya-8974: Thanks for taking a look at the page, and some of the new links are fine... but... not to be the no-fun brigade, but I disagree with restoring the original passage. My changes weren't intended to be an addition or expansion to the original page, but rather a replacement. To go into some more detail as to why the old version was problematic...

trumppedia redirects to a buy-this-domain squatter page. Not a useful link.
The phrasing about "not a repository for outrage" is dismissive. No, outrage alone is rarely notable, but the things people are outraged about are generally notable events. As Donald Trump is the president of the United States, even completely non-governmental actions, like him tweeting LIBERATE MINNESOTA, has been Wikipedia-notable with actual influence on the real world, encouraging anti-lockdown protests (see: 2020_United_States_anti-lockdown_protests#Response). Other governmental actions may seem minor but have serious, real-world impact on real-world people, even when covered less by the media. Blandly dismissing it as just those crazy thin-skinned people getting worked up again is not productive. Basically, the essay you linked of WP:INSIGNIFICANT is the one that's on-point: it's the wrong discussion to have. If Trump's actions are notable and verifiable, then they should be covered.
"There isn't enough data in the world to store that kind of a library." - Actually, there is. See WP:NOTPAPER. Consider that the Wayback Machine exists, which is essentially archiving the entire Internet. Size of content isn't a concern here. (Of course, this line was surely intended to be a joke, but it's not a funny one if so.) SnowFire (talk) 21:57, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Mkay, I am correcting the nutsell. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:17, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mkay, I am correcting the nutsell. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:19, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2020 US presidential election

If Donald Trump lose the title of the US president after the election, we would have to rename this page to something else, maybe "Wikipedia:Not every single thing a country leader does deserves an article". --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 07:29, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing that "what if" version in my subpage here. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 07:33, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update – Yes, Trump has lost the president title. Biden will take its oath on January 2021. --Soumya-8974 (he) ^talk _contribs ^subpages 08:16, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The title "President" is retained for life by all Presidents of the United States, hence President Obama, President Bush, President Clinton, President Carter... Also, I have a feeling that President Trump is unlikely to recede from the headlines upon ceasing to hold office. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:51, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Destination move of the WP:TRUMP shortcut

I moved the destination of WP:TRUMP to shortcut to the essay to make discussions, such as deletion discussions, easier. It was a bold move. If there are any issues, here are the following subsequent edits I made to sort out the links. Most of them are archives, so it won't be too much of an issue to revert: Special:Diff/1226590515 Special:Diff/1226591091 Special:Diff/1226591228 Special:Diff/1226591392 Special:Diff/1226591520 Special:Diff/1226591672 Special:Diff/1226591814 Special:Diff/1226591915 Special:Diff/1226592031 Special:Diff/1226592139 Special:Diff/1226592232 Special:Diff/1226592310 Svampesky (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]