RationalWiki:Articles for demotion/Donald Trump 2021

Donald Trump | Result: Promoted to bronze

 * – ( View discussion View log )

Make RationalWiki Gold Again

 * 1) Easily a gold cover nomination, the only objection was the possibility that the lead (and cover story) could receive extremely significant alterations. Seems to not have happened in the 4 months the doofus has been out of office. Let's do this. 21:18, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) I agree. He's more missional and relevant than Ken Ham or many other people we cover.  23:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * More relevant, but definitely not more missional. I'd say Ham is more old-school RW. Gangster Computer God (talk) 20:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I won this election by like, a lot

 * 1) I don’t like that there are segments with just a main template and no other text. 20:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) I strive to clean this page right the hell up when my final assessments are over in two weeks, and some smaller bits over this period. It's a massive effort, but I need something to do and it will be worth it in the long term. Only at that point can we, or even should, discuss whether this page should be upgraded. Its layout prevents any upgrade discussion, because it's such a clutter. 11 May 2021, 19:11 (UTC)

And this guy came up to me ... big, burly guy, tears in his eyes, and he said, "Sir! Sir, this is Bronze!"

 * 1) Read the thing from start to finish. Structurally, it's a mess, the lede is bad, and generally, the article does a poor job of identifying and explaining the key aspects of his rise to power and presidency. There's a minimum of 10 hours' solid work just to unfuck it enough to make it silver, and that's without having to dick around negotiating obvious improvements on the talk page. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 12:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Actually agree. The article is very disorganized. I mean at a glance it looks great because it seems long and has a ton of sources, but the article itself, it needs a lot of improvement. It's surprisingly hard to just *find* or retain information in general, difficult to complete the article and get a sufficient summary of things. As for disorganization: What is the "Stranger things" section? What goes in there? What's the relationship of the information there? Should "Pretending to be religious" go in "Stranger things"? What's the rationale for the location of "Rare moments of sanity" being located right before his awful presidency and even his rhetoric? Should Stranger things really go into his presidency or his background before presidency? Why is the presidency section so far down in the article, and why doesn't it seem very... sufficient? Why does his presidency begin with Russia collusion rather than begin with what he actually did for the U.S., which isn't discussed until after cabinet members, and when it is, it is about "dismantling Obama's legacy" when I feel that doesn't accurately sum up the presidency. The section "Undermining democratic institutions" doesn't even go into detail how Trump is doing it, and it just lists the democracy index. I know maybe it's listed in other parts of the article, but that makes it a fault of article organization. I know a lot of content from this mammoth article was relocated to separate articles, but this also means you shouldn't have nearly empty sections that link to the main page. Those articles should be comprehensive, but the main article still needs a really good summary, not a one-liner. What we can do for starters is the first section of the article should be background information. How Trump was raised, grew up, and then maybe it can go into his business ventures to show his background as a lying scam-artist, which the article kinda does do. But should the business ventures section also talk about how he used to presidency to funnel money into his coffers? I don't see mention of his hotels even though his university and Golf courses have sections. The article "Presidency" is a smattering of information. And after that.... the article is abruptly over. There is a list of nicknames shortly after, but after that, it's just a list. I keep pouring through this page and I keep finishing it as feeling like there's a lot more to be said about Donald Trump. Certainly, a lot of information is relocated to smaller articles, but the article doesn't have a proper flow to it and should alleviate the gaps we created from relocating information. But that's a start. tl;dr: Just remember, my issue with the page is that I read and and came away not feeling like I know a lot about Trump and I have no idea about the relationship of his smaller pages. Maybe there's a point earlier that the article being about an ongoing subject shouldn't be an obstacle for gold, but this is May, and there's nothing about how Trump was barred from social media for inciting an insurrection, or I just can't find the information in the section I'm looking in; maybe the section is in the lead section, but I hit Ctrl+F just to find it, and I see, at most, an implication he got banned. I'm also not seeing much information on the post-2020 status including legal investigations into Trump. The subject matter is still hot and volatile. Getting information up to date is already a challenge, but writing it well, organizing it, sourcing it, and re-summarizing Trump is another monster Gooper Blooper. I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert on Trump and his influence and legacy, but the article isn't helping me either, and if it doesn't help me, I doubt it's going to be a worthy gold article.  21:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) It’s all already been said, there’s a case to be made this shouldn’t even be bronze. One other structural oddity I noticed: “Rare moments of sanity” is a section that’s meant to be about his stopped clock moments, yet there’s a subsection of a different section entirely titled “A stopped clock on Iraq?”. Iraq isn’t mentioned in rare moments of sanity at all. Christopher (talk) 21:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) (EC)This reminds me a lot of our Brexit article. Both are obviously the result of regularly updating a very important rapidly changing subject with obsessive dedication. Both will likely not be fixed because so much has accumulated it takes a herculean effort to read the damn thing, let alone "clean it up." At least we could start fixing the Brexit article because Brexit is, if you will, "finished." I'm not so confident saying that Trump is just yet.-Flandres (talk) 21:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) Not until he croaks. Bongolian (talk) 07:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) Kevs   Ping!  07:46, 8 May 2021 (UTC)