Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acting Vice President


 * 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 no consensus to delete, default to keep. Any merging, renaming, etc., as variously proposed, is an editorial matter. Sandstein 19:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Acting Vice President

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Talk 23:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC) *Wait a sec, this AfD is turning into a Rfc. An Afd is for voting 'keep', 'merge' or 'delete', our comments are beginning to dominate this AfD. GoodDay 22:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Article is a hoax. The office of "Acting Vice President" does not exist. JasonCNJ 22:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Revise and rename. The article is not a "hoax" in the sense of consisting of false information deliberately inserted by the creator. The primary author, User:Ericl, really does believe what he has written. Unfortunately, he's wrong; as JasonCNJ has pointed out, there is not and never was an office in the US federal government called "Acting Vice President." However, before nuking the article, it does appear to contain useful content: a laboriously prepared list, in a format that I've never seen before (but compiled from reliable sources and not original research), of the persons who were next-in-line to the Presidency at times when there was no Vice President of the United States. The article should be cleaned up, edited, and renamed to a more appropriate title. Newyorkbrad 22:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Revise and rename as per Newyorkbrad. This is actually a rather good article- interesting, verified encyclopedic information. J Milburn 22:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to something like List of successors to the President of the United States in the absence of a Vice President (a mouthful, maybe someone else can do better), but remove or deemphasize that "Acting Vice President" stuff as it's unofficial/informal and at best difficult to verify. --Dhartung | Talk 22:49, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete While it is correct that the article is not technically a hoax, it is completely inaccurate. As a political scientist with two degrees in American Politics, I can say with complete certainty that there has never been an office called "Acting Vice President". I am also unconvinced that the information included in the table is worth preserving, though I am open to changing that position. Soltak | Talk 22:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The Constitution of the United States & Presidential Succession Acts 1792, 1886 & 1947 don't mention 'Acting Vice President of the United States. The list content of this article is dealt with here. GoodDay 22:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That is the appropriate article to merge to, then. I do think the list in "Acting Vice Presidents" has some more information. Newyorkbrad 22:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The only appropriate article to merge to would be President pro tempore of the United States Senate, which does not cover this point at all and is woefully short of the early history of the office. The problem with that "Next in line" list being in Presidential Succession Act is that the subject of that article is 1947 legislation. --Dhartung | Talk 02:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete who cares anyways, and also, just out of interest does any other country apart from america have presidents? Fails spectacularly to have any sort of world view whatsoever! Jcuk 23:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Many countries other than America have Presidents with similar duties and authority. See List of Republics for further information. Soltak |
 * Comment that was actually meant as sarcasm, as the author of the article obviously hadnt written with any sort of world view in mind. Jcuk 22:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * True, but in this context that's the least of our issues, and could be addressed by a name change if it were the only problem. List of Presidents of the United States doesn't have much of a world view either, alas. Newyorkbrad 23:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to something else per Newyorkbrad and Dhartung. The table has some merit as a list of people who were once first in line to the Presidency of the United States, but they did not hold the title "Acting Vice President." --Metropolitan90 00:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename this article should be renamed and merged with a vice president page. If you noticed the title directly above the chart does not mention "Acting Vice President".  I tried to avoid using that alleged title because it is not a real title.  The U.S. Vice President page also shows vacancies.  This article basically fills those gaps.  Someone even linked those vacancies to the article.  The table listed shows how they became "next in line" which is the basic source.  Also some of the first several people in the article were mentioned as "Acting Vice President" in their own articles after this one was created.  I would say "next in line".  Those should be revised as well.  Jjmillerhistorian 01:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the article per GoodDay. The list already exists.  Renaming to List of Presidential Successors would be inappropriate unless its re-written to include every Vice President.  List of Successors to the Presidency of the United States in the Absence of a Vice President is an absurdly long title which frankly no one would ever search for.  If people are looking for succession, they would likely search for presidential succession and go from there.  I had never heard that any of these folks were ever addressed as Mr. Vice President.  Is there a source for that? Montco 06:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Found a source, but I don't know how reliable it is. suite101.com/article.cfm/presidents_and_first_ladies/116788 (apparently suite101.com/ is a blacklisted link) It sounds like it was an unofficial title until 1886 when the line of succession changed. Jjmillerhistorian 07:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just when I get too sure of my own convictions, I surprise even myself. While its true that there is no constitutional office of Acting Vice President, the US Senate web page uses the title Acting Vice President when referring to Samuel Southard and Willie Magnum who were Presidents Pro Tempore under Tyler.  I still think the list is better placed under the page I earlier posted, but I guess the term can be used.  Regarding jjmillerhistorian's link, I guess its ok.  High school teachers don't usually rate high in my list of "experts" but I don't see that the author has any incentive to lie and he is independent.  Montco 07:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There are additional sources for use of the term as well. David Davis (Senate president pro tem) is called "Acting Vice-President" at the Senate memorial service for James Garfield, for example. This 1864 Statesman's Yearbook says the Senate presidents pro tem are known as Acting Vice-President "until their successors can be elected". There are numerous other 19th century sources using the term, so the article is correct that this usage was common even though it is not supported by legislation.--Dhartung | Talk 08:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Was the title 'Acting Vice President' used verbally? 'yes'. Does the office lawfully exist? 'no'. The president pro tempore during VP vacancies, can't cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate. Therefore he wasn't 'truly' Acting VP (couldn't assume ALL duties). GoodDay 18:52, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Now I have Abraham Lincoln in his own words, saying in an 1856 speech (when he was in the House), "In 1841 Harrison died and John Tyler succeeded to the Presidency, and William R. King, of Alabama, was elected Acting Vice-President by the Senate". Leaving aside the fact that his dates were mixed up, if this isn't just a bit of rhetoric, it suggests that there was actually an office, which obviously had no constitutional basis, but it may have been an office established by the Senate. More research is obviously needed.--Dhartung | Talk 21:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought it was interesting William Rufus King was 'Acting veep' much longer than he was a real Vice President. Jjmillerhistorian 22:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: This is interesting new information, new to me as well. Perhaps a useful short article could be created at "Acting Vice President of the United States" incorporating this, with the listing merged into the presidential succession pages. Newyorkbrad 20:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Update: So far 5-delete, 5-rename. Far from a consensus. GoodDay 23:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Two of the delete votes assert that the article is a hoax, which has been proven incorrect. The closing admin should take that into account unless they return and present new arguments. --Dhartung | Talk 02:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the hoax votes actually point out that the office doesn't exist, and they are correct. Regardless of whether certain individuals have used the term in the past, there is simply no office under any law or the Constitution called "Acting-Vice President."  The information is more trivia than anything useful, and should absolutely be deleted. JCO312 03:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * But we have sources which verify that it was a real thing -- title, symbolic role, or what have you -- and contemporaries agree that it was considered a solemn responsibility. The Constitution makes no reference to parties yet the most important person in the Senate is the Senate Majority Leader. Wikipedia is not just about the offices that are in the constitution. I admit that I was skeptical myself until I read the sources. --Dhartung | Talk 06:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * We have sources that indicate that on 3 or 4 occasions a significant person used the term. The Senate never "created" this position.  I wouldn't object to including this information somewhere else (the name proposed by User:Dhartung is a little unwiedly.  But certainly, at the very least, this needs a rewrite to indicate that this is NOT a real office. JCO312 15:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, it is not a real office. That certainly explains away all the hits on .gov domains, such as and the term seems to have been used right up throught the 1970s, i.e. the last period prior to the 25th Amendment and the appointment of Ford. In only one of those cases  is there a suggestion that the title was never officially conferred. This definitely merits further research, and the article seems to have inaccuracies and some supposition (i.e. WP:OR) filling in blanks, but it was indeed a real office albeit not a constitutional office. --Dhartung | Talk 20:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The first citation you've given explains the problem in a nutshell, it refers to William Rufus King as being "in effect the acting vice president." It does not say that he was the Acting Vice President, because there is no such office.  As User:GoodDay has pointed out, unlike an Acting President (who assumes all of the powers of the Presidency), the "Acting Vice President" is not empowered to break ties in the Senate.  At the very least, this article needs to start off with a sentence that acknowledges that this is not an actual position in the United States Government, and instead, is a term that has, in the past, been used to describe a situation where there is no Vice President. JCO312 15:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. This is a list of people who were at some point in time actually next-in-line for the U.S. Presidency without being V.P. Such a list is well-defined and interesting, and could be a starting point for research into some aspects of American politics. The Presidential Succession Act has a partial listing of this content in each of the "Potential Implementation" sections. The "Next in line" list in that article does not identify when the V.P. office was actually vacant, which this list does. This list should either be linked from that article or merged to that article. Gimmetrow 05:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It could be renamed Vice Presidential Vacancies or similar for a short title. I just revised the page a little.  Maybe this could be merged or mentioned on the Vice Presidents article as well. Jjmillerhistorian 15:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename per Newyorkbrad.--Grand Slam 7 | Talk 12:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Rename to something else per Newyorkbrad and Dhartung. WMMartin 14:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep but cleanup and verify. I withdraw the rename suggestion now that there is sufficient verification of the title. --Dhartung | Talk 20:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've made some changes which I think address some of the concerns. The list, as it stands, is needlessly long, as it includes people who were next in line to become Acting President, but who, even according to the entry, could not be referred to as "Acting Vice President" because they were not the President Pro Tempore.  Perhaps renaming the article would solve that problem. JCO312 18:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * We should mention 'in a revised version' however, that the president pro tempore, can't assume all of the VP duties (a ppt can't cast a tie-breaking vote). This fact, makes the 'Acting VP' title questionable. GoodDay 18:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, you've already added the 'tie-breaking vote' duty, which is performed by the VP only. GoodDay 18:59, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I moved the table to the Presidential Succession Act page, and reduced it on this page, such that only Presidents Pro Tempore are included, as they are the only ones who could be referred to as "Acting Vice President." As written, I would change my vote to Keep JCO312 00:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur with your interpretation (that the office could only be held by Presidents pro tem), and I believe verification will come in time. The move of the other next-in-line guys helps. The quibble about the AVP being unable to cast a tie-breaking vote actually seems to have been a debated issue in the impeachment of Andrew Johnson, by the way. Further discussion on Talk page. --Dhartung | Talk 07:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep renaming and/or merging may be appropriate, but they don't require an AfD. Eluchil404 08:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article itself says that the title isn't an actual title. The fact that the list in there has the title "List of people who could have been referred to as 'Acting Vice President'" doesn't help as well.  The "position" isn't even anything more than being next in line when there is no vice president.  It doesn't really matter to me that people used the term once or twice.  I'm sure more than one Senator has been called an "asshole" by the President, that doesn't make "asshole" an official title.  I wouldn't object to the information being moved, though, maybe to List of Presidents pro tempore of the United States Senate.  --UsaSatsui 18:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 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.