Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Trump and Fascism


 * 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 speedy deleted first and foremost as a G5 problem. In the minute chance that someone else thinks that this is worth re-creating, do without socking first although the consensus was overwhelming so that should be a sign to second-guess trying this again. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump and Fascism

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

POV article and negative BLP (although I don't think it rises to the level of attack). While this has been discussed extensively in the media, this topic has already been brought up on Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 and Fascism in North America. Majora (talk) 07:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep well referenced and a more significant topic then most of the pageant winners like Meg McGuffin etc. I learned some interesting things reading it. Legacypac (talk) 07:38, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:17, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:17, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:17, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Rename to something like "Far-right" or "Neo-Nazi" or whatever "...endorsement of Donald Trump."  That is what the article is mainly about and seems to be a notable topic, at least right now. Borock (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Good idea - it's not that Trump is endorsing the far right its that the far right is latching on to Thrump. Legacypac (talk) 12:21, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * For the record, I think Trump is appealing to the fascist instinct but I don't see any evidence that he is or would be a fascist himself. He is more liberal and internationalist than lots of other Republicans. (I'm not voting for him.)  Borock (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep'To keep the article strictly neutral and factual, I chose to limit the references to those about the phenomenon of Trump's popularity with such groups, which seems to be an objective and encylopedic  phenomena, and thus should be kept, since the increase of popularity of these groups, as claimed in these articles, seems to be a significant (and troubling)  historical phenomena our readers may wish to know of. I could have also listed a number of other references where Trump's policy proposals have been criticized as fascist, but I left these out in order to not push a POV and just present the facts to our readers, who deserve them. I am not opposed to a rename if anyone has a good suggestion, and I am happy to have others make edits to the article if they see ways to improve it. Cheers.King Of The Wikipedians (talk) 18:21, 30 December 2015 (UTC)  reverted as per WP:BLOCK EVASION 15:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)  — King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Ok, even if you were to clean up the POV language (which I don't think you did) how is this still not a content fork or worse a POV fork? Why did you decide to create a new article instead of just adding to the mentions of this topic in the articles that already exist? --Majora (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This article has room to grow! Imagine if Trump is somehow elected. Or even gets nominated by his party. There will be much more Fascism related news coming on Trump, and we wouldn't want to take away too much space from reports on his reality television endeavors from his main page. Besides, the revival of mainstream fascism in 2015, 70 years after we thought we had killed it, now back as an unashamed political platform in the persons of Trump and Le Pen in France, is an encylopedic and notable phenomenon. I provided lots of hard evidence here. Closing our eyes doesn't make it go away. Maybe a section connecting Trump to the unseemly revival of Fascists globally, like Le Pen, would be in order. What do you say? I remind you of WP: NOTCENSORSHIP — Preceding unsigned comment added by King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) 19:13, 30 December 2015 (UTC)   reverted as per WP:BLOCK EVASION 15:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)  — King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * And I don't understand these claims of POV. Although I myself regard Trump as a charlatan, fraud, demagogue, and Hitler replica unfrozen from the sands of time, and see his supporters as fawning, sycophantic goose-steppers all-too-eager to lead Muslims, Jews, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Blacks and anyone else they can get their hands on to the crematoria, I DID not insert these opinions into the article. At no point did I add one whit of my personal opinion that Trump is likely already drawing up the blueprints for the crematoria now. I merely objectively reported a newsworthy phenomenon:Trump's massive popularity with hate groups,  and his increase in their popularity, and the widespread news reports that his fellow candidates have called him Fascism. My god, if this isn't what an encylopedia is for, then what is? I left my personal opinions entirely out of it, and just reported the facts, with exceedingly strong references. Have a look for yourself.King Of The Wikipedians (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 19:26, 30 December 2015 (UTC)  reverted as per WP:BLOCK EVASION 15:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)  — King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Strong Delete You cannot possibly be serious with this article, with its unapologetic political agenda. Wikipedia is not the Huffington Post. And Adoil Descended (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * [personal attack removed]
 * Stop the the personal attacks immediately. They are a violation of Wikipedia policy.  (And as you know, that is not an accurate description of their username). Mattflaschen - Talk 06:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a classic case of WP:COATRACK, taking articles about far-right groups and perceived support for the candidate to define Trump as a fascist. Believe you me, I'm no fan of the Donald, but this article is nothing more than an attack piece. Alansohn (talk) 20:03, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, you've got to be kidding me. Who thought this was a good idea?— S Marshall  T/C 20:11, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Instead of deleting this article, I vote we collaborate and get this article up to GA status. There is a treasure trove of knowledge  here that we can build upon!  As has been pointed out numerous times, this is far more encylopedic than Meg McGuffin or The Apprentice Rises Again: Season 7 Recap or much of the flotsam and jetsam that masquerades as knowledge around here. This is a real historical event. We are called to report on this revival of Fascism in the 21st century. We stand on the front lines of history. The choice is yours.King Of The Wikipedians (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2015 (UTC)  reverted as per WP:BLOCK EVASION 15:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)  — King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment Here is an example of a comparable article: Republican and conservative support for Barack Obama in 2008. Borock (talk) 20:57, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete So blatantly POV and cherry-picked it's embarrassing, and casts a poor light on everyone who works on Wikipedia. Also skirts the intent of BLP via technicalities. Not the proper venue for political axe-grinding or character assassination, no matter if it is altruistically motivated by "killing a baby Hitler". - CompliantDrone (talk) 16:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * "Comment" I've added even more references and moved the reports of Trump's Hitler book, which he is claimed by his ex-wife to keep in his bedside cabinet to its own section. I've also added the NYTimes story from September about Trump's father having been a Klansmen, along with Trump's denial to this collaboration. Let's work together, not against each other, and we can make this article great again, comrades. To the barricades (of knowledge)!King Of The Wikipedians (talk) 19:01, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reverted as per WP:BLOCK EVASION 15:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)  — King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * This article now features 100 references. I vote for "Featured Article" Status, not Deletion.King Of The Wikipedians (talk) 20:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reverted as per WP:BLOCK EVASION 15:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)  — King Of The Wikipedians (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete The article has no lede, so I'm not able to check the reliable sources that identify this as a topic worthy of notice.  Nor can our readers.  Whatever there is to be said about Trump and fascism, this is nowhere close to being WP:NPOV.  I quickly found three paragraphs about Miss USA without any stated relevance to the topic, so the article is coat-racking unrelated material.  Unscintillating (talk) 23:33, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - This type of blatant BLP hit piece should be embarrassing to everyone who has ever contributed a sentence to it. Personally, I think Donald Trump is a piece of work who is completely lacking in temperament, ideology, education and meaningful experience for the office for which he is now a candidate, but attempting to tag him as a "fascist" -- on par with Hitler, Tojo and Mussolini -- is disgusting.  There should be no room for this type of garbage in a serious encyclopedia; it's what gives a black eye to Wikipedia and holds us up to the derision of the media and the public.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 00:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Got some good laughs but Fascist's support of Trump != Trump's support of fascism....and it seems like this page attempts to equate them. 24.102.247.42 (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ADDITIONAL COMMENT: User:King Of The Wikipedians shows exceptional familiarity with Wikipedia's processes for a supposed new editor. 24.102.247.42 (talk) 03:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete - Just an article meant to defame someone and push a Far-Left political agenda. Whoever started this should be blocked from using Wikipedia. LiberatorLX (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article is a WP:BLP time bomb. Instead of looking at just the content, look at the sources in which derives this article as well. The massive collection of references either:
 * A) cover statements and opinions made by one or more people over the span of Donald Trump's candidacy
 * B) provide opinionated analysis or interpretation of these different statements
 * C) discuss social media or "buzz" influences that have trended as a result of those statements
 * The article then takes all of these different references and attempts to either connect them with one another when they have no relation, or establish the parent article subject with fascism. The underlying topic of this article does not appear to be neutral, and is not an encyclopedic aspect of a WP:BLP that should be covered to this extent. Each viewpoint should have its own due weight, and this article does not abide to Wikipedia's core principle that all view points be equally covered.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   03:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep extremely well-referenced information that has significance for our community. This article cites mainstream sources like CNN http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/24/politics/donald-trump-fascism/ and is of value by providing an historical context for a notable phenomenon. HistoryReaderWithPHD
 * Note: This editor was registered today and has no edits outside this AfD --Majora (talk) 04:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is a WP:POVFORK.—azuki (talk · contribs · email) 04:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: The article is currently on Google News's front page as a "Wikipedia:" link. This may attract a higher-than-usual amount of attention to this RfD.  (The news stories are about a video by Al-Shabab which uses Donald Trump in it; topic link is here at the moment though that link might expire soon.  The group of articles includes this article as an example.)  —AySz88\ ^ - ^  04:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looks like more "work" by to me. I have tagged some suspicious accounts accordingly.  Doc   talk  05:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Another non-fan of Trump here, but this article is OR and unhelpful. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 05:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The more I look at it, the more glaringly obvious it is who is behind the account that created this pile of slop. It meets WP:G5 and is a major BLP issue. The edits of in particular should be revdeleted for BLP violations after the account is indeffed for being a blatant quacking sock of Kingshowman. This is a no-brainer.  Doc   talk  05:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Unencylopedic essay-like POV pushing. 108.2.58.56 (talk) 05:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Not only is this unencyclopedic and loaded with framed political language, it came up in my Google News feed as a Donald Trump reference (why I'm here). Drop it as soon as possible. 76.181.233.121 (talk) 05:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Absolutely no reason to maintain. This "hit piece" is intentionally inflammatory and serves no purpose other than being a slanted, politically motivated attack piece. Keep this garbage on internet forums, not here. 96.61.173.1 (talk) 05:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * DELETE – This wiki entry is rife with political hubris, innuendo and pot-calling-kettle-black. While it might be agreed that Trump is a personification of Mussolini, there is a strong argument that Clinton is a subversive personification of Hitler due to her outright lying to the public on Bengazi, private email server scandal, Clinton foundation conflicts of interest, etc., all verifiable, if even uncomfortable, and side-stepped facts by the Clinton political machine. To put a singular political figure in the same vein as Fascism completely misses the point that Fascism is first and foremost a 'corporatist/statist' aligned form of government. Corporate welfare, which is rampant in American economic policy, is a defining principle of Fascism. The SCOTUS Citizens United Ruling simply ensconced the corporatists/statist basis of Fascism into American further and deeper into politics. Has it been lost on the argument that Clinton is running her campaign, as far as the dollars total garnered, on the very corporatist campaign contributions that are part of the corporatist/statist agenda America is sliding deeper into with each succeeding incoming president, regardless of political affiliation? Trump or Clinton being Fascist in their own rights are at their core really Straw Man arguments in the final analysis, and inflammatory and hubris ones at that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoR. Caarl Robinson (talk • contribs)


 * 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.