Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Not My Presidents Day

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2017 March 24.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 merge to Protests against Donald Trump. Selectively, so as not to overwhelm the target article. Although there is a strong "keep" minority, if one considers the "delete" opinions as well, I think the merger is the most consensual option. One does not need a crystal ball to anticipate that protests like this, with attendant media coverage, are going to continue as long as Donald Trump is in office. Therefore, editors should discuss how to structure the coverage of them in Wikipedia going forward, for example via an RfC. Options might include: protests per year, per month, per territory, etc. Sandstein 11:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not My Presidents Day

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

WP:RECENTISM, NOTNEWS, not notable. Having a protest is not necessarily enough for inclusion. This is no way near the scale of the Women's March. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 21:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 21:42, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It may be recent, but there are rallies taking place in many major US cities [1]. In addition, thousands have attended [2], [3], [4]. I think you jumped the gun nominating the article a mere 10 minutes after creation, as well. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. This protest is taking place in multiple major cities. This nomination is premature and more time should be given for the article to expand. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:51, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a flawed argument. Articles in mainspace need to comply with policy at all times. If they don't comply with WP:DEL, they may be deleted. In such cases it's the creation of the article, not the deletion, that has been premature. WP:TOOSOON – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sure. I was meaning to remind reviewers that they were viewing a stub that did not reflect the scope of the subject, hoping they'd do some research and not vote based on Wikipedia's 'under construction' coverage. I still think the article should be kept per WP:GNG. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:54, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: to Protests against Donald Trump. I'm not sure every protest against Donald Trump merits a stand-alone article. p b p 22:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Subject is notable enough for its own article. RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 22:12, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to Protests against Donald Trump. Again, Wikipedia should not be used as a soapbox for political activism. And not every protest deserves an article. — JFG ^talk 22:17, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, Wikipedia should not be used as a soapbox and not every article deserves an article. But I don't see either as a reason for merging this article, which is about a notable event that has received plenty of secondary coverage. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:25, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Protests against Donald Trump, per what p b p said. Ethanbas ^(talk) 22:19, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge. There's going to be a lot of protests for the next four years. Not every single one deserves a stand-alone article. See the precedent at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 London general election protest. No lasting significance per WP:EVENT. AusLondonder (talk) 22:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a major protest although, like the Day Without Immigrants 2017, which has an article. RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 22:33, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a major protest. There were 100 people in Oregon. AusLondonder (talk) 22:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thousands in New York though (and probably other cities). RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 22:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AusLondonder: I'd have to disagree and say this was a major protest that involved quite a few major cities and certainly plenty of press coverage. The number of people participating in Oregon is not what we're discussing here. I am curious, do you still vote to delete now that the article has been expanded a bit? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge nothing but a stub, it amuses me that we have all these anti-Trump protest articles at AfD the whole time. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now start class. RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} | _Edits 23:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Protests against Donald Trump. We don't need an article for every single protest that takes place in the US. It is newsworthy, but not encyclopediaworthy (WP:NOTNEWS). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Protests against Donald Trump. This particular series of protests don't seem notable enough to warrant their own article. It doesn't seem to have received as much coverage as the Women's March and the airport protests, nor is it in the same scale as those two. κατάστασ η 01:34, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Protests against Donald Trump. AHusain3141 (talk) 02:40, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notable political event--Praveen:talk 04:28, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — notable. Needs some cleanup work, the tag is currently working against that. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 08:49, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - This user has been blocked due to arbitration enforcements elsewhere. Jdcomix (talk) 18:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Merge into Protests against Donald Trump - Per numerous other users. Jdcomix (talk) 15:03, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - More than enough sources now that I look. Jdcomix (talk) 19:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment for everyone !voting "merge," please consider that the size of the Not My Presidents Day article is already pretty large. Adding it to Protests against Donald Trump would make a large article even more unwieldy. In addition, the assertion that there is not a lot of coverage of the day is belied by the sources cited in the article which are, as of my writing, 45 - and I plan to add more information after I write this. There were thousands of people across the nation coordinating together in these protests. That is worthy of an encyclopedia article. It's not like this was one protest in New York City: it was across the country, with thousands of participants and received significant attention. This does not come under the WP:NOTNEWS criteria. There is 1) no original reporting here, 2) this is not routine news: it documents a large-scale event 3) N/A, 4) N/A. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closers please do not let political attitudes color the judgment of closure on this discussion. Some editors above have made comments that I feel shows a bias, intentional or not. This article was created in good faith by Another Believer to write about a large-scale event that should be included in Wikipedia based on GNG, with coverage in the news both locally and internationally. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Megalibrarygirl You need to AGF, the same can be said about your vote to keep. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 20:03, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming good faith is important, you're right. But it's not going to stop me from doing what I think is right in discussing articles at AfD, in this case, calling out your extremely quick nomination for deletion. Nominating any article within 10 minutes of its creation is "jumping the gun." I'm not trying to hurt your feelings, Sir Joseph, I am leveling what I feel is valid criticism. BTW, I was not referring to your nomination as being political in tone, it's some !votes above that I was referring to (otherwise I would have said "the nominator" as I normally do in AfD). I assume no political motive for your nomination, I just think you nominated it too quickly and I disagree with your reasons for deletion. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Protests against Donald Trump after pruning, per Megalibrarygirl, to avoid undue weight. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 19:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Andreas Philopater: Can you clarify a bit? User:Megalibrarygirl was advocating to keep the article, but you're using her commentary to vote merge? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:03, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Megalibrarygirl provides a "comment" arguing against merging because the article under discussion is "already pretty large" and that merging "would make a large article even more unwieldy". Pruning addresses that concern. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 20:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Seems to be a well referenced article. There may come a time in the future when articles such as this can be merged into one article, but at the moment history is in the making, so individual events are currently of significance and interest. Time will tell. Giano (talk) 20:52, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge WP:NOTNEWS, WP:10YT, etc. We do document nearly every protest against Trump at Timeline of protests against Donald Trump but few of these pass the bar to get their own articles. This seems closer to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inauguration of Donald Trump protests than it does to the more notable protests.LM2000 (talk) 03:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Protests against Donald Trump article. GoodDay (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Enough information to warrant its own article. Kamalthebest (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not news. Thus we do not cover events on one day in a seperate article when they are part of a large movement or trend.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:10, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I personally believe that most of this article's content can be trimmed, then we can transfer what's left to Protests against Donald Trump. Bobnorwal (talk) 23:48, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agree -- Merge I feel that this article can be kept better maintained if it's together with the other micro article on Protests against Donald Trump. BoredBored (talk) 00:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There clearly is enough information to warrant its own article and this much content will not fit into Protests against Donald Trump. Merge is essentially telling this content to go away, which has NPOV implications. Trackinfo (talk) 02:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and Merge an edited down version of contents to Protests against Donald Trump. There is enough to keep as part of that article, which should be split into campaign protests, post-election protests and post-inauguration protests.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:21, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Protests against Donald Trump article. It is unnecessary to create a new page to mention about it. Marxistfounder (talk) 07:59, 28 February 2017 (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.