- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Hatnote added to 2016 article for 2000 article, as suggested below. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 16:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Donald Trump presidential campaign ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:TWODABS CatcherStorm talk 03:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'd suggest withdrawing this.
WP:TWODABS only applies if one article is the primary topic and the page therefore has "(disambiguation)" in the title, which is obviously not the case here. The last sentence if TWODABS reads "If neither of the two meanings is primary, then a normal disambiguation page is used at the base name."
Jenks24 (
talk) 03:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Well, obviously this isn't going to be withdrawn. I think it's pretty clear there isn't going to a consensus to delete, mainly for the common sense reason that typing "Donald Trump presidential campaign" (or linking to it) should get the reader somewhere. Personally, I don't much mind between keeping the dab as is or redirecting to the 2016 article and adding a hatnote to it – if I must be counted one way or the other though, I guess redirecting as a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT would be my slight preference. I disagree with the idea of redirecting to Donald Trump#Political career, that seems least likely to help the reader get to the article and information they want. Jenks24 ( talk) 16:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep not seeing a problem with this. Legacypac ( talk) 04:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Redirect to Donald Trump#Political career. WP:TWODABS doesn't apply, but it's still an unnecessary disambiguation due to the fact that the same information can be found in more detail at Trump's biography. -- Tavix ( talk) 04:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'd also support a redirect to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT (I thought I had already mentioned this, but apparently not.) -- Tavix ( talk) 00:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. sst ✈ 05:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. sst ✈ 05:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Support. The key question at this juncture is whether one or the other of these campaigns is the one people will look for now and into the future. The 2000 campaign -- for a third party shot which never materialized -- was already much shorter and less consequential than the current campaign. No need to inflate its import. Pointing this to the politics section of the bio works just as well. Pandeist ( talk) 05:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- @
Pandeist: @
Jenks24: I really don't think this page is necessary. Searching "Donald Trump presidential campaign" will show only 3 results, which are links to both his campaigns and then the disambiguation page. This would be the same with all the other presidential campaign DAB pages I've nominated for deletion. If someone is looking for Trump's campaigns and they search "Donald Trump presidential campaign...", the search bar already clearly notates both of his campaigns. A disambiguation page would therefore be unnecessary.
CatcherStorm
talk 06:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
See what I mean?
- @
Pandeist: @
Jenks24: I really don't think this page is necessary. Searching "Donald Trump presidential campaign" will show only 3 results, which are links to both his campaigns and then the disambiguation page. This would be the same with all the other presidential campaign DAB pages I've nominated for deletion. If someone is looking for Trump's campaigns and they search "Donald Trump presidential campaign...", the search bar already clearly notates both of his campaigns. A disambiguation page would therefore be unnecessary.
CatcherStorm
talk 06:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: TWODABS does not say there should be no disambiguation pages with only two entries: it refers to cases where there is a primary topic plus one other, which can be better handled by a hatnote.
WP:TWODABS says:
If neither of the two meanings is primary, then a normal disambiguation page is used at the base name.
Pam D 10:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC) - Keep CatcherStorm, did you mean WP:TWODABS? If you click on it, you'll see it only refers to disambiguation pages with "(disambiguation)" in the title list only two meanings, one of them being the primary topic, which doesn't fit this. Perfectly valid dab page. A redirect to Donald Trump#Political career makes it hard for people to find these two pages on the topic, which is the opposite of what we aim for. If the articles themselves are not worth it, that's a discussion for elsewhere, a merge/redirect to Donald Trump#Politics. While the articles on these precise topics exist, we should make them easy to find. Additionally if it's the 2016 campaign you're interested in, there's a bit of scrolling down before you get there from that link, which isn't very user-friendly. Would you consider withdrawing nomination? Boleyn ( talk) 12:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think it's quite right to say TWODABS only applies to dabs with (disambiguation) in the title. Sure, if we had a Chingford (disambiguation) that listed the London suburb and a non-notable song, as opposed to a hatnote, that would be wrong, but it would be just as wrong if I moved the page to Chingford, London and made the base title a disambiguation page. (I'll start a discussion about this language at WT:MOSDAB.)
- That being said, there's nothing wrong with this page in particular assuming there isn't a primary topic between the two campaigns. I think you can make a pretty strong argument that the current campaign is primary, however. The 2000 campaign was a blip—there was only one highly notable third-party campaign that year, and it wasn't Trump's. And when I created this page as a redirect to the current campaign article, there wasn't one for the 2000 campaign. I don't doubt the earlier campaign is notable, but count me pretty skeptical that it has anything like parity with the current one. Yeah, actually, the more I think about it, the more I want to say redirect to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. No need to delete either way. -- BDD ( talk) 14:39, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment WP:TWODABS starts: Some disambiguation pages with "(disambiguation)" in the title list only two meanings, one of them being the primary topic. In such cases... These are the only ones it discusses. It could be redirected, but then the 2016 page would need to be moved to the primary page, and a hatnote to earlier campaign added. Boleyn ( talk) 14:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: We're beating the WP:TWODABS horse to death here, but usually when I see someone cite WP:TWODABS in this situation, what they usually actually mean is that they think there is primary topic that would create a WP:TWODAB situation if rectified (ie: in this case, the primary topic would be Trump's 2016 election, which would create Donald Trump presidential campaign (disambiguation) once redirected there, and that would be the WP:TWODAB. Since I believe we're actually talking about a WP:DABPRIMARY situation, could those who !voted "keep" without addressing the redirect suggestions to either Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 ( WP:PRIMARYTOPIC) or Donald Trump#Political career (no primary topic, but redirect to a subject that covers both articles) explain why a straight-up keep is better than any of those suggestions? Thanks, -- Tavix ( talk) 14:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I originally closed as Snow Keep as nominator's AFDs so far have been obvious Keeps however in this case I clearly should've left it open so I've reopened it. –Davey2010Talk 20:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - I'd say the article should be expanded to include all his flirtations with running for president (2012, 1988, etc). - mattbuck ( Talk) 21:30, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I think that's the idea behind Tavix's redirect proposal. Such an article wouldn't really belong at the current title. Donald Trump presidential campaigns, perhaps, or Political career of Donald Trump. -- BDD ( talk) 00:26, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Redirect I understand the reasoning behind this nomination, as his 2016 campaign is far more widespread and notable than his 2000 Reform Party run. However, his 2000 campaign is also notable. So my recommendation is to redirect this article to his 2016 campaign since thats what the majority of the people are looking for when they land on this disambiguation, and add a hatnote there informing readers about the existence of his 2000 campaign. → Call me Razr Nation 06:05, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was redirect to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Hatnote added to 2016 article for 2000 article, as suggested below. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 16:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Donald Trump presidential campaign ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:TWODABS CatcherStorm talk 03:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'd suggest withdrawing this.
WP:TWODABS only applies if one article is the primary topic and the page therefore has "(disambiguation)" in the title, which is obviously not the case here. The last sentence if TWODABS reads "If neither of the two meanings is primary, then a normal disambiguation page is used at the base name."
Jenks24 (
talk) 03:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Well, obviously this isn't going to be withdrawn. I think it's pretty clear there isn't going to a consensus to delete, mainly for the common sense reason that typing "Donald Trump presidential campaign" (or linking to it) should get the reader somewhere. Personally, I don't much mind between keeping the dab as is or redirecting to the 2016 article and adding a hatnote to it – if I must be counted one way or the other though, I guess redirecting as a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT would be my slight preference. I disagree with the idea of redirecting to Donald Trump#Political career, that seems least likely to help the reader get to the article and information they want. Jenks24 ( talk) 16:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep not seeing a problem with this. Legacypac ( talk) 04:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Redirect to Donald Trump#Political career. WP:TWODABS doesn't apply, but it's still an unnecessary disambiguation due to the fact that the same information can be found in more detail at Trump's biography. -- Tavix ( talk) 04:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'd also support a redirect to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT (I thought I had already mentioned this, but apparently not.) -- Tavix ( talk) 00:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. sst ✈ 05:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. sst ✈ 05:27, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Support. The key question at this juncture is whether one or the other of these campaigns is the one people will look for now and into the future. The 2000 campaign -- for a third party shot which never materialized -- was already much shorter and less consequential than the current campaign. No need to inflate its import. Pointing this to the politics section of the bio works just as well. Pandeist ( talk) 05:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- @
Pandeist: @
Jenks24: I really don't think this page is necessary. Searching "Donald Trump presidential campaign" will show only 3 results, which are links to both his campaigns and then the disambiguation page. This would be the same with all the other presidential campaign DAB pages I've nominated for deletion. If someone is looking for Trump's campaigns and they search "Donald Trump presidential campaign...", the search bar already clearly notates both of his campaigns. A disambiguation page would therefore be unnecessary.
CatcherStorm
talk 06:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
See what I mean?
- @
Pandeist: @
Jenks24: I really don't think this page is necessary. Searching "Donald Trump presidential campaign" will show only 3 results, which are links to both his campaigns and then the disambiguation page. This would be the same with all the other presidential campaign DAB pages I've nominated for deletion. If someone is looking for Trump's campaigns and they search "Donald Trump presidential campaign...", the search bar already clearly notates both of his campaigns. A disambiguation page would therefore be unnecessary.
CatcherStorm
talk 06:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: TWODABS does not say there should be no disambiguation pages with only two entries: it refers to cases where there is a primary topic plus one other, which can be better handled by a hatnote.
WP:TWODABS says:
If neither of the two meanings is primary, then a normal disambiguation page is used at the base name.
Pam D 10:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC) - Keep CatcherStorm, did you mean WP:TWODABS? If you click on it, you'll see it only refers to disambiguation pages with "(disambiguation)" in the title list only two meanings, one of them being the primary topic, which doesn't fit this. Perfectly valid dab page. A redirect to Donald Trump#Political career makes it hard for people to find these two pages on the topic, which is the opposite of what we aim for. If the articles themselves are not worth it, that's a discussion for elsewhere, a merge/redirect to Donald Trump#Politics. While the articles on these precise topics exist, we should make them easy to find. Additionally if it's the 2016 campaign you're interested in, there's a bit of scrolling down before you get there from that link, which isn't very user-friendly. Would you consider withdrawing nomination? Boleyn ( talk) 12:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think it's quite right to say TWODABS only applies to dabs with (disambiguation) in the title. Sure, if we had a Chingford (disambiguation) that listed the London suburb and a non-notable song, as opposed to a hatnote, that would be wrong, but it would be just as wrong if I moved the page to Chingford, London and made the base title a disambiguation page. (I'll start a discussion about this language at WT:MOSDAB.)
- That being said, there's nothing wrong with this page in particular assuming there isn't a primary topic between the two campaigns. I think you can make a pretty strong argument that the current campaign is primary, however. The 2000 campaign was a blip—there was only one highly notable third-party campaign that year, and it wasn't Trump's. And when I created this page as a redirect to the current campaign article, there wasn't one for the 2000 campaign. I don't doubt the earlier campaign is notable, but count me pretty skeptical that it has anything like parity with the current one. Yeah, actually, the more I think about it, the more I want to say redirect to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. No need to delete either way. -- BDD ( talk) 14:39, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment WP:TWODABS starts: Some disambiguation pages with "(disambiguation)" in the title list only two meanings, one of them being the primary topic. In such cases... These are the only ones it discusses. It could be redirected, but then the 2016 page would need to be moved to the primary page, and a hatnote to earlier campaign added. Boleyn ( talk) 14:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: We're beating the WP:TWODABS horse to death here, but usually when I see someone cite WP:TWODABS in this situation, what they usually actually mean is that they think there is primary topic that would create a WP:TWODAB situation if rectified (ie: in this case, the primary topic would be Trump's 2016 election, which would create Donald Trump presidential campaign (disambiguation) once redirected there, and that would be the WP:TWODAB. Since I believe we're actually talking about a WP:DABPRIMARY situation, could those who !voted "keep" without addressing the redirect suggestions to either Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 ( WP:PRIMARYTOPIC) or Donald Trump#Political career (no primary topic, but redirect to a subject that covers both articles) explain why a straight-up keep is better than any of those suggestions? Thanks, -- Tavix ( talk) 14:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I originally closed as Snow Keep as nominator's AFDs so far have been obvious Keeps however in this case I clearly should've left it open so I've reopened it. –Davey2010Talk 20:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - I'd say the article should be expanded to include all his flirtations with running for president (2012, 1988, etc). - mattbuck ( Talk) 21:30, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- I think that's the idea behind Tavix's redirect proposal. Such an article wouldn't really belong at the current title. Donald Trump presidential campaigns, perhaps, or Political career of Donald Trump. -- BDD ( talk) 00:26, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- Redirect I understand the reasoning behind this nomination, as his 2016 campaign is far more widespread and notable than his 2000 Reform Party run. However, his 2000 campaign is also notable. So my recommendation is to redirect this article to his 2016 campaign since thats what the majority of the people are looking for when they land on this disambiguation, and add a hatnote there informing readers about the existence of his 2000 campaign. → Call me Razr Nation 06:05, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.