RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Draft:MAGA politicians by state
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Draft:MAGA politicians by state | Result: 10 days with no consensus[edit]
Delete[edit]
- The creator hasn't really offered a defense as to how this is relevant, so you can look in the talk page for the reasons why this isn't useful. Tl;dr it's just a list with no other information (a purpose that should be fulfilled by categories), there are way too many to reasonably list and it would require constant updating, and splitting them by state isn't really significant to our mission. Plus, having a completely unsourced list of living people isn't really helping us right now. If RationalDude can't provide an explanation of why we should have this, then this just isn't going anywhere and should be deleted. Plutocow (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- A simple list of people with less-than-worthless opinions? Luigifan18 (talk) 19:59, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- Christopher (talk) 20:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- cosmikdebris talk stalk 15:32, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- At this point in time, the GOP has essentially been taken over by the MAGA cult. Non-fascist Republicans have almost all fled the party. This is most nakedly apparent from when the criminal ex-POTUS tanked the bipartisan immigration bill in Congress at the last minute so that he could try to get re-elected by blaming Democrats on immigration.[1] Bongolian (talk) 05:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
There are waaaay too many MAGA politician for this to ever make sense. I also agree with Plutocow's points. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 20:31, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- Every single Republican Politician is a MAGA politician since at least 2019, so having this list is kinda pointless unless you rename it to 'Republican Politicians by State' A somebody. (talk) 01:35, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Keep[edit]
- I think it could grow into something relevant to RW. For example, actually fleshing out the definition of a 'MAGA politician', noting which of those things each entry ticks, what positions etc they've run for etc. I agree that there should be some form of 'notability' guideline - for example, only allowing entries to be put in if they have a WP or RW page. I think it should be allowed the chance - plus, it's a draft less than 24 hours old. KarmaPolice (talk) 19:53, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- A lot of this could be covered under the Trumpism article. Basically every politician has a Wikipedia page, and if we limit it to those with RW articles that's what categories are for Plutocow (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- No they don't - Federal level, yes. But not state level [or lower]. Plus, if there are criteria that you have to pass to be defined as 'MAGA' [I would personally put it being an active pusher of shit, lies etc - simply echoing others and nodding simply makes you a suckup]. If it was me, I would do it a bit like they did for 'List of creationist scientists' - the colours perhaps representing their current position of power. Anyway, if you don't like lists, you'd better AfD A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism! KarmaPolice (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Every single person in the (to pick an arbitrary state) Missouri House of Representatives has a Wikipedia article. That alone is over 100 different Republicans we'd have to parse, not to mention those that retired/were defeated in the last few years and the ones that are entering in the next election (and every election after that). The difference between this and A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism is that at least that article has an explicitly layed out grouping of people to put on the list that doesn't extend indefinitely and at least putting the credentials of those people makes a point about ultracrepidarianism, etc. That list is of people who signed one document, the list of Trump-loving politicians is just going to keep expanding year after year. If we're going to limit it to just those with RW pages, that's what a category is for. And even if none of these problems existed, getting a specific criterea could itself be contentious, supporting Trump could apply to practically all of the Republican party (even those who say they don't tend to agree with him on more policy positions than not). Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- I did argue that the bar for inclusion should be higher than simply being a spineless suckup. And the argument that 'we'd constantly have to update' could be levelled at any page with a 'live' event or person. KarmaPolice (talk) 00:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Every single person in the (to pick an arbitrary state) Missouri House of Representatives has a Wikipedia article. That alone is over 100 different Republicans we'd have to parse, not to mention those that retired/were defeated in the last few years and the ones that are entering in the next election (and every election after that). The difference between this and A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism is that at least that article has an explicitly layed out grouping of people to put on the list that doesn't extend indefinitely and at least putting the credentials of those people makes a point about ultracrepidarianism, etc. That list is of people who signed one document, the list of Trump-loving politicians is just going to keep expanding year after year. If we're going to limit it to just those with RW pages, that's what a category is for. And even if none of these problems existed, getting a specific criterea could itself be contentious, supporting Trump could apply to practically all of the Republican party (even those who say they don't tend to agree with him on more policy positions than not). Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- No they don't - Federal level, yes. But not state level [or lower]. Plus, if there are criteria that you have to pass to be defined as 'MAGA' [I would personally put it being an active pusher of shit, lies etc - simply echoing others and nodding simply makes you a suckup]. If it was me, I would do it a bit like they did for 'List of creationist scientists' - the colours perhaps representing their current position of power. Anyway, if you don't like lists, you'd better AfD A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism! KarmaPolice (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- A lot of this could be covered under the Trumpism article. Basically every politician has a Wikipedia page, and if we limit it to those with RW articles that's what categories are for Plutocow (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
- Personally, I think a quick list of people with breathtakingly awful beliefs who don't deserve even a single vote is missional…Luigifan18 (talk) 18:41, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Carthage (talk) 19:11, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- I’m working on it, I have several other drafts I’m also working on. Plus I just posted the defense in the talk page. The list is just for the famous/notable ones, not literally every single maga politician. Rational Dude enter thy lair 21:56, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- How do you determine who's famous/notable? There are people on that page I've never heard of and I tend to pay attention to such things Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Like KarmaPolice said, based on criteria. Like Mark Robinson and Kristi Noem are infamous for their black nazi and dog shooting controversies respectively, and I decided to add every state because even the lesser known ones should at least be mentioned. Rational Dude enter thy lair 23:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Which criteria? We don't have notability guidelines for a reason, and this isn't something like YouTube where you can slap an arbitrary number on it and call it a day. Having a Wikipedia page is a terrible criterion as I already explained and if having an RW page is it you have to explain what will differentiate that page from a category. Also, please stick with whatever criteria you're going with, you don't need to stretch it to include every state (some states by nature will have smaller/more fringe MAGA movements). Also would love to point out that you don't list Donald Trump despite him being the MAGA politician, oh and you still have absolutely zero references or any content on that page beyond just a list of names. Like what else are you even gonna include? Plutocow (talk) 00:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Trump may be the figurehead, but its mostly about his cronies. And like I said before, I'm working on it. I still have a bunch of other drafts to work on. Rational Dude enter thy lair 14:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Which criteria? We don't have notability guidelines for a reason, and this isn't something like YouTube where you can slap an arbitrary number on it and call it a day. Having a Wikipedia page is a terrible criterion as I already explained and if having an RW page is it you have to explain what will differentiate that page from a category. Also, please stick with whatever criteria you're going with, you don't need to stretch it to include every state (some states by nature will have smaller/more fringe MAGA movements). Also would love to point out that you don't list Donald Trump despite him being the MAGA politician, oh and you still have absolutely zero references or any content on that page beyond just a list of names. Like what else are you even gonna include? Plutocow (talk) 00:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Like KarmaPolice said, based on criteria. Like Mark Robinson and Kristi Noem are infamous for their black nazi and dog shooting controversies respectively, and I decided to add every state because even the lesser known ones should at least be mentioned. Rational Dude enter thy lair 23:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- How do you determine who's famous/notable? There are people on that page I've never heard of and I tend to pay attention to such things Plutocow (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 00:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
Merge/redirect[edit]
Goat[edit]
- I'll switch my vote to end the deadlock if Rational Dude pinkie-promises to me that he can make this project good. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 16:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- I will, I promise and you have my word. We need brain!
Give us brain! 22:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- In what way will you make it "good"? I'm skeptical since RD has a history of not really improving their articles that get sent back to draftspace (e.g. Holocene extinction) Plutocow (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- I’m still working on that. And I’ll improve this draft by expanding it, adding as many sources and references as possible, and a bit of snark. We need brain! Give us brain! 19:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's not exactly convincing. What do you plan on doing to expand the article beyond just adding more and more names? Plutocow (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- What do you think I should do? It’s just a list to catalogue the most well known maga wingnuts by state, with descriptions of course. We need brain! Give us brain! 22:32, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- a) A tiny bio [former/current positions held] and b) what they've done to deserve being on this list - being a MAGA suckup or 'going along with the crowd' isn't enough. One action I think would justify this would be repeated, firm 2020 election allegations. KarmaPolice (talk) 13:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- I can add that. We need brain! Give us brain! 00:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's not exactly convincing. What do you plan on doing to expand the article beyond just adding more and more names? Plutocow (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- I’m still working on that. And I’ll improve this draft by expanding it, adding as many sources and references as possible, and a bit of snark. We need brain! Give us brain! 19:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- In what way will you make it "good"? I'm skeptical since RD has a history of not really improving their articles that get sent back to draftspace (e.g. Holocene extinction) Plutocow (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2024 (UTC)