RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Republican backlash against Donald Trump

Republican backlash against Donald Trump | Result: Deleted

Republican backlash against Donald Trump (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete

1. This is not worthy of its own article. Anything of merit should go on the Trump page. Bongolian (talk) 02:31, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
2. Either merge with Trump's page or the 2016 Repub primary election.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 02:35, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
3. Let it marinate in a sandbox and see what happens before it lives on as a main space stub. Then I also suggest the topic has a better home at the other aforementioned established articles. ∈ NameThatNobodyTakes (✎) 04:57, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
4. A single sentence about something of questionable missionality does not belong in mainspace.--JorisEnter (talk) 07:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
5. Refusing to endorse a candidate, like Ted Cruz did, hardly constitutes a "backlash". Furthermore, being noteworthy is not the same as being missional on RationalWiki. And lots of sub-articles about a subject really aren't our thing. On the contrary, there has been a recent move towards merging several smaller articles to form one big one. And if all you've got to write about something is one sentence, it's most definitely not time for you to create a mainspace article about it yet. Spud (talk) 09:35, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

   I would write more,but I don't see the point if it's going to be deleted-Maeve (talk) 12:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

6. Just no. Okay then, why on earth would this merit an article of its own? ScepticWombat (talk) 10:10, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
7. There are missional aspects of Trump that could be spun off into separate articles, e.g. Trump's authoritarianism or Trump and religion or conspiracy theories about Trump being a democrat agent, but why this? Annquin (talk) 10:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Keep

1. Put a notice on the talk page anticipating this. The Trump article is long enough already. It's like a TOS agreement,the longer it is, the less chance people are going to read everything. The fact is, the large amount of Republicans coming out against Trump is very noteworthy and I really fail to see any good arguments on here so far as to why it shouldn't have its own article.-Maeve (talk) 04:26, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Goat

1. Move to Sandbox/Userspace another Jewish conspiracy by (((Laurogeita Hamabost))) (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2016 (UTC)