Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Republicans opposing Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Ya  sh  !   17:54, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

List of Republicans opposing Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable nor is it encyclopedic. None of this exists for other presidents BlackAmerican (talk) 03:18, 5 September 2016 (UTC) Possible Merge to List of Hillary Clinton presidential campaign endorsements, 2016 for Balance BlackAmerican (talk) 05:53, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. FallingGravity 03:40, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. FallingGravity 03:40, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Easily meets WP:LISTN, with significant, in-depth coverage of this set/group over a series of months. Coverage is both national and international and notes the historic nature of the intra-party split. See, e.g., NY Times (special interactive feature - NYT has maintained its own list), The Hill (has maintained its own dynamically updated list); Washington Post, the Associated Press, The Guardian, The Independent (referring to "unprecedented splits") and many more. Neutralitytalk 03:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 September 5.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 03:45, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Rightly or wrongly this is a situation/issue that gets media attention outside Wikipedia. That said I think, if we keep it, we should make sure the sources support that they are Republicans and that they are on record as against Trump. (And that if they switch to grudgingly supporting Trump, as I believe Michael Reagan did, they be removed. Not that he seems to be on it.) Sometimes these things get so nebulous we end up including anyone who worked for a Republican or anyone who wrote for a conservative magazine and I don't think that's reasonable. (Like say if Whit Stillman endorses Hillary or Johnson I don't think that should count unless we can source he is a self-identified Republican.) I would be good with a List of Democrats opposing Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016 for balance.--T. Anthony (talk) 05:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Such an article might exist in the future, though it would need substantial content. Currently, I count three Democrats on Trump's list of endorsements. I see one Democrat on Gary Johnson's endorsement page and it's hard to tell with Jill Stein's endorsement page. You could probably find some by digging through the Bernie Sanders' endorsement article and finding the holdouts. FallingGravity 05:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep -- a relevant list and a topic of discussion. Entries appear to be well sourced. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep - just like I said on the other AFD, this article establishes notability and verifiability in over 88 reliable sources. It is notable in that it discusses coverage regarding the anti-Trump movement, and has been covered in reliable sources and news outlets, even with Trump being the presidential nominee. — Mythdon 07:17, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Lack of similar articles for other presidents is not a reason for deletion. The fact that there is a strong opposition to this presidential nominee from his own party is a large part of what makes this notable. Meters (talk) 08:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:35, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: Per Meters' comments above. KConWiki (talk) 02:01, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per comments of Neutrality, Mythdon, and Meters.--NextUSprez (talk) 15:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Give it amnesty. No, delete it's illegal ass for stealing a job from a God-fearing Murican list. No, I'll tell you what I think after the election. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article is very misleading as written. In some cases, the figures listed have indicated that they don't plan to endorse Trump; in others, they have indicated that they won't vote for Trump; in others, they have indicated that they will be voting for Clinton. Those are 3 very different positions, and the article makes no distinction between them. Also, I wouldn't characterize a non-endorsement as opposition.CFredkin (talk) 23:53, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
 * My keep was one of the weaker ones, because I think there's some real concerns about the lasting significance and how you do this list. I'm not switching to delete, but I want to agree that if (as it seems likely) it's kept it will need to be looked after and improved. Maybe dividing the sub-sections into who they endorse, or whether they endorse anyone, would be a good idea. Or even spin-off separate lists like List of Republicans endorsing Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016, List of Republicans endorsing Gary Johnson presidential campaign, 2016, List of Republicans endorsing Evan McMullin presidential campaign, 2016, and have this just be people listed as people just not endorsing anyone or going write-in.--T. Anthony (talk) 03:00, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * CFredkin has valid complaints about some entries that I have just addressed. These correctable details do not detract from the overall importance of the article. Andy Anderson 04:42, 7 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndyAnderson (talk • contribs)


 * Keep - Just because there might be some problems with how the article is written doesn't mean the whole thing should be deleted. Merging this into other endorsement pages would omit important members of the #NeverTrump movement like Mitt Romney or George Bush. FallingGravity 01:34, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep — Similar to pages of endorsements for Trump and for Clinton; more importantly this is a notable group of Republicans because of the unprecedented number of them who are opposed to Trump. I would say that it is, in fact, encyclopedic, being both reasonably comprehensive, relating to notable people, and well-documented Andy Anderson 04:40, 7 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndyAnderson (talk • contribs)
 * Keep Trump has faced more opposition from notable figures in his own party than any general election candidate in recent times. This has generated considerably coverage and is a notable subject.LM2000 (talk) 04:41, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per Neutrality's rationale. List verified by a multitude and variety of reliable sources. Nominator seems to wrongly assume in their rationale for deletion that that this article is made up of Republican's now supporting Clinton; it's actually made up of Republican's now supporting Clinton, Republican's now supporting Johnson, Republican's not voting – what do all three have in common? not supporting Trump. —MelbourneStar ☆ talk 04:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Per Neutrality Moira98 (talk) 04:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – Instances of GOP candidates opposing Trump have been notable. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 16:04, 12 September 2016 (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.