Talk:Twitter Space with Ron DeSantis and Elon Musk

Merge this article into Ron DeSantis 2024 presidential campaign
The announcement itself, while more notable than others, should definitely be merged into DeSantis' campaign article. Don't see how simply this event should be itself a standalone article, better as a section within his presidential campaign article.  Invading Invader  (userpage, talk) 17:12, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Too soon to be deciding if this needs a merge. Furthermore, this is about Twitter and Musk as much as it is about DeSantis, so I don't think it's clear that it should be merged to the DeSantis campaign article. It also appears to easily pass WP:EVENTCRITERIA #2. –– Formal Dude  (talk)  17:20, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge - There's no reason the announcement of DeSantis's campaign shouldn't be in the article about his campaign. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge. Article is too small to begin with and should, if anything, be the very beginning of the Desantis campaign article.  conman33  (. . .talk)  23:42, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge - There's no there there. --Pokelova (talk) 23:58, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose — There is plenty of political analysis and some technical discussion on this event that barely takes it to the mainspace. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:01, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge — Not enough content — and in my opinion, significance — to warrant its own article. The information that is there can be easily incorporated into the actual article for DeSantis's campaign, and a lot of it already is. The Green Star Collector (talk) 02:10, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge Agree 100% with The Green Star Collector above, and generally with the other merge comments. I just don't see the practicality in keeping this as a standalone article, when the relevant content can easily be incorporated into the aforementioned campaign article (and much of it is already there). A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge See all the above. House1090 (talk) 03:50, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Reminder that WP:TOOLITTLE is a poor argument. And article content does not determine notability, the source material exists prevalently, even very short writing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability. Being very widely covered in diverse sources and having an national and potentially international impact makes this event notable. An article may be a stub even though many sources exist and it simply has not been expanded yet. Such a page is better expanded than merged into a larger page, and there has not been enough time to allow that expansion; this article hasn't even existed for 24 hours yet. –– Formal Dude  (talk)  06:53, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy merge Obviously the launch of the campaign should be covered in the campaign's article, and there is no need for a separate page here. Even if there is analysis and discussion of it, that should be written about in the context of the main article and expanded there first and then only split when length warrants it. This is now just junk duplication. Even if there are sources that technically pass GNG, we also have WP:NEVENT and WP:NOPAGE that indicate that not every sourced or notable concept needs its own separate article right away. Reywas92Talk 17:21, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - this happened only days ago, we cannot know yet if a merge is needed, as it's not like this was a mostly irrelevant event. It was the official announcement of a widely anticipated campaign, and the glitches and questionable choices about the platform and methods used to announce the campaign could make this an infamous incident in the history of American politics, so I believe it has enough potential relevancy that it should remain a separate article, at least for the time being. GramCanMineAway (talk) 22:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge for the time being, no reason why this short article should stand alone, with the option of subsequently splitting if the account of the "interview" becomes long enough for a separate article. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:50, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge – No independent claim to notability. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 14:14, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge; claim to notability is entirely contingent on this being the campaign announcement; merging the genuinely encyclopedic content (that is, content that does not fail RECENTISM and NOTNEWS) will not create any length problems. Potential notability isn't enough to keep a standalone page. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:22, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy merge – See above GreenLoeb (talk) 15:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merge This event isn't notable enough for its own page. Can easily be merged into the campaign article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way, I really hope this gets closed quickly. It's unfortunate this was formatted as a merge request rather than an AfD, because merge requests often stay open for long periods of time before becoming stale due to there not being a standard procedure for closing them. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Merge This should be closed soon, it is a good idea to merge this article, it has weak support and is not notable enough.
 * CostcoantimationsS (talk) 04:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)