Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Rescue Plan


 * 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 keep. WP:SNOW closure. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 19:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

American Rescue Plan

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I believe this should be merged into the Economic policy of the Joe Biden administration page or should be draftified. The page, on its own, does not appear to be written in an encyclopedic format (a large portion of the page is a bulleted list), and the page is focused on a piece of legislation that does not yet appear to have been written nor introduced in the congress. The first source is not an RS, but instead a website dedicated to providing a "easy, convenient way to find financial advisors in your area." The other two sources appear to refer only to Biden's outline of the plan and refer to a speech that Biden gave rather than to the text of any actual document. The article needs work, and the details of the plan do not appear to be public yet. Thus, I see two options: draftify the page and work on it before republishing it, or merge it into the more general economic policy page associated with the Presidency of Joe Biden. I am looking to see what others think. Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:21, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I disagree with your statement. Biden hasn't even proposed his $1.9 trillion stimulus package through Congress yet, and every major stimulus package that the President and Congress passes needs its own page, similar to Obama's Recovery Act and Trump's CARES Act (among others). Once it has been introduced into congressional committees, published, and reported on the news, Biden's stimulus package will get much more traction and information available. Draftifying it is a possible solution, but deletion or merging when it becomes a major topic of reporting is not. Phillip Samuel (talk) 00:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep it. This will become legislation soon.Farcaster (talk) 03:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * (diff: 1) Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - This page was both moved into draft space and tagged for an AFD discussion, apparently through a race condition (edit conflict). The AFD should be allowed to run, and moving the article to draft space is a valid conclusion of the AFD (but not the only possible conclusion).  I am moving the page back into article space so that the AFD can run.  Robert McClenon (talk) 04:08, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This plan has extensive media coverage (even if it's not always called the "American Rescue Plan" in the media) and meets general notability guidelines. It's a core proposal of the Biden administration. He campaigned on it. It's the Biden equivalent of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Missvain (talk) 00:18, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep; seems like an expansive enough subject to warrant an article on its own. Perryprog (talk) 00:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This is very notable and is expected to become law. --AmericanRescuePlan2021 (talk) 00:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Very significant piece of legislation. Wjfox2005 (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep One of the largest pieces of legislation, ever. In addition, likely to be a central news story until passage in early March. (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a good solid skeleton for editors too build on. &#8213; Buster7  &#9742;
 * Keep I don't see a reason to delete UnknownM1 (talk) 18:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Create multiple links, so people can find this, a/k/a "Biden's Covid-19 relief package", "$1.9 trillion coronavirus relief plan", "2021 Covid relief legislation." Senate on 2/05 51-50 passed a budget resolution directly related to this. Known as "the nuclear option" it allows Democrats in the future to push through the package with only a simple majority (vs. needing to convince 10 republican senators to cross the isle.) 1.9t is a significant sum, demanding wikipedia coverage with at least some level of detail. Great article on process from here (substantial work left to do): https://www.opb.org/article/2021/02/03/budget-reconciliation-congress-senate-covid-19-relief/ Once the "budget resolution" passes in the House, expected very soon, its sausage time! No less than 11 Senate committees will start drafting the actual bill, insuring that it includes the provisions of Biden’s "more conceptual" Covid-19 package and adding all the devilish details. That process and results deserve full sunshine WikiPedia coverage. Remove the "delete page" banner ASAP that discourages editing and back to work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.200.231 (talk) 19:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep So is the WP community in agreement then? I created the ARP page knowing it would get significant publicity for at least a year, and definitely now since it's all over the news these days. If this discussion is closed, can we remove the banner ourselves, or does an admin do that? Phillip Samuel (talk) 22:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , we're just waiting for a closure from an uninvolved administrator (or sometimes a user)—see WP:GD. You don't need to do anything :). Perryprog (talk) 22:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 05:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Why was this even considered for deletion? I mean seriously, this is probably the most important legislation of the year. GreenFrogsGoRibbit (talk) 10:23, 6 February 2021 (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.