Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speculation about Donald Trump's Cabinet

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 delete‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:32, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation about Donald Trump's Cabinet

[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)

Here we have the fossil of all those speculation articles. In this case, it's not so much WP:CRYSTAL that he would name a cabinet, but yeah, people made lots of guesses as to whom he would name, and some were right and some were wrong, and nobody really cared about the wrong guesses as soon as nominations appeared, and really, as far as those which were correct, nobody cared about the guesses either, after the fact. This is a prime example of the principle that sourcing is not notability. Yes, the cabinet choices themselves were notable, but we really have to have proof that, some years on now, there was significant interest in decent sources as to what the guesses themselves were. That is definitely not this article, which is no more than a catalogue of those guesses. This material simply isn't encyclopedic; indeed, it's essentially a collection of primary sources for the subject should someone care to research the quality of the guessing or some such thing. Mangoe (talk) 04:06, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and United States of America. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Wasn't notable then and certainly isn't so now. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable infodump whose only notable content duplicates the Cabinet of Donald Trump article. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 14:27, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but move and WP:CLEANUP instead - plenty for Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics to do! RepublicanParty-Lucia-Kwamkior9202 (talk) 14:34, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sockpuppet vote struck by — Trey Maturin™ 14:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The people who were actually in the cabinet is obviously important historical information that we need to retain for posterity, but a record of people who were briefly speculated about as maybe getting appointed to the cabinet, regardless of whether they actually did or not, is of no enduring importance at all. Bearcat (talk) 16:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Cabinet of Donald Trump. To the extent that specific individuals were named in the press as possible appointees to various positions, that can be noted in running text in the article describing who actually filled those seats. BD2412 T 17:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - clearly goes against WP:CRYSTALBALL. — Maile (talk) 21:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively to Cabinet of Donald Trump. As is, the article is far too large to merge. BD2412's wording is important -- the information should be included in running text in the article describing who actually filled those seats -- since the tables as they exist would provide massively WP:UNDUE weight to candidates over the actual officeholders. Cheers, Last1in (talk) 01:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I think if people want to include people who were finalists and actually under consideration in the main Cabinet article as brief running text that's fine, but just because one person speculated a name doesn't mean we have to include that so I'm not going to agree with a wider merge of no-tables version. 2024 Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection and the excessive speculation in similar pages should be deleted too. Reywas92^Talk 16:12, 27 August 2023 (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.