Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 move to draft‎. The consensus was that this is not an appropriate subject for an article yet, but since it is quite certain to be one in the future, having the draft available makes sense for when that time comes. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:08, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

2024 Republican Party vice presidential candidate selection (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Yes Trump the nominee will pick a running mate. No, we don't know who it will be. The speculation as to who will be picked is more WP:CRYSTAL and will be of next to no interest once the selection is made. Another case of sourcing is not notability in action. Mangoe (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, but not forever the contents of this article don't fit in any of the existing 2024 election articles, until we get to the point of the primaries where it is relevant, I'd say we keep this article, and then merge them when the time is right. Scu ba (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I don't think so. Notability is supposed to be forever; therefore, if it be lost, it follows it was never really there to begin with. Mangoe (talk) 02:54, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Candidates and nominees, whether they want to win or have a nice cabinet spot, in America are notable by default for the most part. This especially applies to the 2nd in line to the leadership of the free world as we all put it. Faits1789 (talk) 00:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but with reservations about how early we should be creating these articles because they're getting into 'N for only the wonkiest of wonks' territory at this point. Nate • (chatter) 21:33, 27 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) 07:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Absurd WP:CRYSTALBALL speculation. Just because a writer throws a name (or a WP:KITCHENSINK of them) into the ether, often with little analysis or grounding in reality, doesn't mean we need to put that supposition here. Same goes for previous years' articles where a prose list of finalists belongs in the campaign article, not a whole page with a gallery of meaningless speculation. Reywas92Talk 14:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP:CRYSTAL. This is purely speculation and any relevant information can be added to the main election page. --Enos733 (talk) 15:46, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and others.Draftify: At worst, a WP:CRYSTAL fail; at best, a case of WP:TOOSOON.No objection to a selective merge-and-redirect to 2024 Republican Party presidential primaries or I support draftifying for consideration of re-creation at a time closer to the actual selection process (after the party's presumptive nominee has been established), as possible ATD's. but for now at least, there's no practical reason for this to be a standalone article. Sal2100 (talk) 19:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
!vote revised after reading subsequent comments of other editors. Sal2100 (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to draft. I'm not sure that there will be enough to say about this to have an article separate from the ultimate campaign article, but it is not ready for mainspace as is. BD2412 T 19:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with this--this topic will merit its own article eventually, but at this time without any of the actual primaries occurring, this is too speculative and far into the future. I would make this a draft and only make it an article once the Republican presidential primary field has been officially narrowed down to one or two candidates. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 03:14, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but delete the vps who are only there because of the article "Trumps Veepstakes Begin" StanheDog (talk) 22:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is ridiculous, absolutely no reason for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2crzppul (talk • contribs)
    • Note: The above editor has since been indef-blocked. BD2412 T 21:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There's a lot of useful information. Candidates are increasingly being asked about their vice president pick, so it's not merely media speculation. The polling is also starting to pick up and will be lost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twentytwenty4 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, there's not "useful information" here. All of the speculative suggestions are just that, speculative and unencyclopedic, and the one line of polling is irrelevant. Mangoe (talk) 02:08, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well it depends how informed a person is as to whether there is useful information here. I had no idea about the 12th amendment until reading the article, I was hoping for a Trump/DeSantis ticket but I now know that would be problematic.
I disagree with the term 'speculative suggestions' too. When a candidate such as Trump says he is considering X, Y or Z, he is giving his informed provisional list not having a guess, which is what the media do. Twentytwenty4 (talk) 01:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   ArcAngel   (talk) 21:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I don't see why the speculation in these articles is any different from the speculation in articles used as citations for potential candidates. If we're operating by guidelines this strict, then every single "potential candidates" section on every WP election page apparently violates CRYSTAL. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 18:14, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft/Keep Faits1789 (talk) 00:54, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This article is built off of clear speculation, and although there can be a window to create this article, such as in the vice presidential selections of 2012 and 2016, I think this is not the right time to do so. HarukaAmaranth 春香 02:01, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify, this article will be of some use closer to the time but until then it's just CRYSTAL spitballing. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 14:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - TOOSOON/CRYSTALBALL - Definitely way too soon for this. May be reasonable to bring it back later on, right now it's nothing more than pure media speculation. Putting an abridged version on the main primaries page might be fair, however. It's just not worth a full-fledged article. longestview (talk) 15:56, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I don't think I've ever seen a more misinterpreted rule on Wikipedia than WP:Crystal Ball, which states "Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included". This article is clearly based on speculation by reliable, expert sources. WP:Too Soon is a more reasonable objection, but this is has received a ton of media speculation already, and the selection is probably less than a year away at this point. As for whether this article is of value to anyone, well, I guess that's subjective but personally I find the VP selection articles to be interesting, and I think it's worthwhile to document the process by which one of the most important elected officials in the United States is selected. Orser67 (talk) 21:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is an official primary election event taking place next year. The content needs to be reviewed to make sure only properly sourced info is in the article. NYC Guru (talk) 07:22, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:30, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I want to mention that there are several problems with the content of the article, which is hinted at in the lede. The biggest problem is that this article is based purely on media speculation about who the eventual 2024 Republican nominee for president will be. While the delegates to the Republican convention will officially nominate the VP candidate, in practice, the presumptive presidential nominee will announce their selection of a running mate and the delegates will approve that choice. Since the VP nominee will depend on whom the Republicans nominate, it is better to discuss the speculation on the pages of the candidates, such as Donald Trump 2024 presidential campaign. --Enos733 (talk) 16:14, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Wikipedia is not a news site or a tabloid. We do not need a list of every time someone is mentioned as a possible VP nom - the fact that Kanye is on here demonstrates very well that this is not limited to serious candidates, but is merely a bulletin board where every single possibility mentioned in a source is listed. There is no formal process to outline here. 17:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Delete - Highly speculative given the current legal situation in Georgia. The Republican field still seems wide open. — Maile (talk) 17:57, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify much more appropriate to have this article at least when the primaries occur and more is known on who is the actually presidential nominee. Yeoutie (talk) 19:17, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete without opposition to Userfication or Draftification on the condition that someone expresses plans to work on the article while userfied/draftified (otherwise just delete). A WP:NOT and WP:NOPAGE problem. This is just an aggregation of speculation without sufficient in-depth coverage. By the time we get to the actual election, this will effectively be WP:TNTed anyway. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or draftify: This is pretty much just speculation. WP:CRYSTALBALL. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 14:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete until the nominee is chosen. All of these candidates have completely different merits and only make sense paired with different candidates. Trump isn't going to choose a moderate and a hypothetical Christie candidacy won't choose a radical. Meshing them all together is nonsensical. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 15:50, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or draftifyWP:CRYSTALBALL Lightburst (talk) 00:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep: This is not WP:CRYSTAL, nobody on Wikipedia is making speculation. It is an article about the vice presidential selection process, which is relevant and there are articles for each vice presidential candidate selection going back decades. Claiming the media speculation is irrelevant is also highly untrue. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 00:53, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is complete nonsense. In the first place, there is no Process. The presidential nominee considers the matter and chooses whomever they please. In the second place, at this point, there being no nominees and thus no certainty about whom they may be (yeah, everyone expects a repeat of Biden vs. Trump, but a lot can happen in nine months), everyone is in fact just guessing. And I looked at all those old articles, and the parts about media speculation (which is exactly how it is titled in at least one) ought to be deleted as non-notable cruft. Personally these come across as small heap out of an anthill overwriting of the sort that plagues WP everywhere, for when it comes down to it, the substance could very well be a couple of paragraphs in the campaign articles. Mangoe (talk) 00:07, 23 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2024_Republican_Party_vice_presidential_candidate_selection&oldid=1176778410"