Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign non-political endorsements (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus‎. There does not appear to be any agreement about whether these articles are excessive forks or useful content splits. Malinaccier (talk) 17:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign non-political endorsements

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign non-political endorsements, 2016

Articles for deletion/List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign non-political endorsements (2nd nomination)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sub- and sub-sub-pages of List of Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign political endorsements, which was tied up with the 2017 deletion discussion. These pages stand out among Presidential candidate endorsement articles as excessively forked, hugely reliant on WP:SOCIALMEDIA sources (WP:PSTS) and thus not establishing notability (WP:TRIVIA). I am also nominating the following related pages:

U-Mos (talk) 11:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Politics, and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 12:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a valid page split. The other lists would be too big if this verifiable information were added there. --Enos733 (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting a merger; very little of these pages meets notability through their reliance on WP:PRIMARYSOURCEs, and what's left would take considerable effort to extricate. U-Mos (talk) 18:41, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I said this in 2017 I am not sure Wikipedia is the proper place to document lists of endorsements for political candidates (Notable endorsements covered in multiple independent sources, probably as part of the main campaign page). Is AfD the proper place to hold this discussion, though? I still feel that AFD is not the right forum to determine whether we should retain all endorsements. That said, the main topic Clinton 2016 endorsements is notable, and it can be assumed that a page split (based on size) can inherit the notability from the primary topic. - Enos733 (talk) 19:50, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Keep - 2002crash1 (talk) 02:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note It's come to my attention that there is a content guideline at Wikipedia:Political endorsements, with endemic violations of points 2 and 3 of the inclusion criteria for individual endorsements apparent on the pages here proposed for deletion. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Kamala Harris 2024 presidential campaign endorsements. U-Mos (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Content can be fixed through normal editing. - Enos733 (talk) 03:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Easier to WP:BLOWITUP in my opinion. U-Mos (talk) 06:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malinaccier (talk) 14:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it violates Wikipedia:Political endorsements. If such a ridiculous result can be somehow justified based on the current text of the guidelines, then the guideline text needs to be revised. I cannot find any list of endorsements in WP:RS that even remotely resemble this one in scope. Therefore, most (99%?) of mentions in these lists are WP:UNDUE. --Викидим (talk) 22:51, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep According to Category:Lists of United States presidential candidate endorsements, the same sub-list thing is happening with both Biden and Trump 2020. The guideline is from 2020 based on an RFC, but the guideline either doesn't really get enacted, or there are simply too many wiki-notable people expressing clear endorsement. A general discussion should take place at guideline level, not at AfD, how to deal with such prominent presidential campaigns. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:36, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that you agree that the endorsement guidelines are either ignored or defective. If so, why keep the article until the guidelines are fixed? The deletion of these lists and discussion of the WP:ENDORSED can peacefully coexist IMHO. Викидим (talk) 09:07, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Löschen Clearly an example of WP:RECENTISM, is not notable as is 8 years later. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 23:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also seems like it would fail Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists#Notability. I don't know if it is particularly notable to know all non-political endorsers of Hillary Clinton as a group Bluethricecreamman (talk) 01:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTDIRECTORY also applies too. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 01:25, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The question is whether this is a valid page split (for size) WP:SPINOUT. I think it is. I also think it is unnecessary to start over from scratch on content. - Enos733 (talk) 04:43, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.