- Carrier Air Conditioner move to Mexico (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
!.) Article deleted back in March. Issue, however, continued to be a campaign theme. Today it's making national headlines again as Trump/Pence announce that Carrier has been persuaded to reverse its decision. New York Times here: [1] Carrier's move to Mexico was the campaign's emblematic example on offshoring, the issue that seems to have won the rust belt for Trump. Insofar as I remember original article, which I wrote, it was objective and well-sourced. If it is brought back, I will edit/bring it up to date.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC) E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- As closer, I suggested to E.M.Gregory that they gather consensus on an appropriate project or article talk page about whether this news changes Wikipedia's opinion about whether the topic should be covered in its own article as opposed to in existing articles (e.g., about the company, or about Trump). Might as well happen here, I guess. I myself have no opinion about that issue. Sandstein 16:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that I did not dispute the close last March. My point now is that the situation has changed, dramatically, and I would like to recover the old article's text and edit history to start an update on what is now, again a major story that users will expect to be able to find on Wikipedia.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- To get a sense of the significance of this idea to the Trump campaign/administration over the course of what is now almost a year, scroll down this search of WaPo articles. [2].E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Just my opinion here, but this story is big enough to save Trump in the electoral college election on December 19. Trump just announced a major press conference on December 15 to (IMO) subvert the constitutional legal challenge on emoluments in the electoral college. Is Carrier encyclopedic? I'm not a fan of guessing the future, but that doesn't ever seem to stop the newspaper writers around here. Unscintillating (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse. Perfectly reasonable call of a rough consensus to delete. Clear reasons to delete were articulated, without effectiveness counter arguments. Other statements were made, not sure what to do with them, there may be a way forward, but undeleting the article is not it. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not questioning Sandstein's decision to delete. I am asking to have the article restored because the political conversation around that Carrier plant had changed so dramatically. The deleted article can be conveniently reduced to a good first section, and the article will be expanded.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:16, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait... did I do this wrong? Should I be asking for a view of that page, so that I could condense, and use it as the first section of a new article???E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore/relist the AfD was eight months ago and not particularly well attended, the topic has moved on dramatically since then and it's very hard to argue that AfD should be at all binding now. Gregory: I'd be happy to email the content of the deleted article to you, just leave a note on my talk page. It is rather dated and will mostly need rewriting anyway. There isn't anything actually preventing you from starting a new article at this title as long as your version shows some kind of improvement over the deleted one, although I wouldn't recommend using the exact text of the deleted one (as it would be a copyright violation unless an admin restored the history). Hut 8.5 20:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd lean toward userfication and then restoration rather than immediate restoration and listing. But yeah, what Hut said. Hobit (talk) 22:59, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- (edit conflict × 2) Userfy An ongoing news bubble continues in the central US, and I checked both site:.uk and site:.au where I can verify the presence of international coverage. People have been wondering why Pence has not stepped down as governor of Indiana, and now we get one answer. Another big name in this news story is Sanders. I also find it interesting that the Republican-oriented news is reporting 2000 jobs saved...while the liberal-oriented news was initially reporting 1000 jobs, and now it is 800; with $7,000,000 shifted from Indiana tax payers to Carrier. Here is an article published in Australia that cites a professor as saying it is "uncommon for extensive negotiations to take place prior to the president-elect taking office." Unscintillating (talk) 23:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes. There is definitely a developing story. Not sure it is is ready for an article, but it could well be soon. Userfication is a way forward. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to draft space or userify/ DGG ( talk ) 00:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at the name of the article, that could be an issue, too, as I believe that it was Carrier furnace that remained in Indiana. Unscintillating (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
|
