Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nunes memo


 * 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 SNOW keep. And perhaps one or more of SK#2/3 (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Nunes memo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:Not news. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Ctrl+F for "memo" on CNN.com, foxnews.com, msnbc.com, wsj.com, yahoo.com... any major American news publication, to be honest - you'll find plenty of news. Believe me - Enter Movie (talk) 03:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow close. It's been front-page news around the globe for days. Either it will take down the Mueller investigation, or it will be a permanent stain on the House. And the nomination is based on WP:NOTNEWS? Please. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 03:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - The article documents a historically unprecedented series of events and is supported by hundreds, if not thousands of reliable sources. The nominator does not seem to grasp the actual intent behind WP:NOTNEWS. - MrX 🖋 03:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Seriously? Not News, D.C. was going apeshit over this today. If this is undeserving of a wikipedia page, I do not know what is! Jasonanaggie (talk) 03:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Every Morning (there's a halo...) 05:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Every Morning (there's a halo...) 05:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Snow close. This article meets and more than fulfills all criteria for article creation. Any problems can be worked out at the article through normal editing. We're long past the "NOTNEWS" phase.
 * The Steele dossier is part of a serious intelligence investigation.
 * The Nunes memo is part of a nonsensical GOP conspiracy theory and cover-up.
 * We document both as very significant documents, of widely different types. History will remember them both. -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:48, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep Clearly meets WP:N and article went to WP:AfD this week and was a speedy close.Casprings (talk) 05:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. massive amounts of news coverage. WP:NOTNEWS if for things like 'stupid criminal stories', "local man saves dog", or "Beyonce to perform tomorrow" stories. Whether this topic eventually gets merged into a larger article or changes name is beyond the scope of this discussion, but the topic is undoubtedly notable per WP:GNG. surely has been around long enough to know about WP:BEFORE, and the article is full of references, but if more sources are desired, Been Around, please click the first two links after "Find sources" above. This is a bad faith, drive-by nomination, bordering on vandalism. --Animalparty! (talk) 06:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. I can't speak for anyone else but his entry has already shaped up as a partisan effort to discredit the memo and make the entire exercise look like a GOP plot. That is to say, the entry is, at this critical time when people are looking for reliable information, 100% biased. It should be deleted until such time as a proper entry is put forward. 175.158.49.91 07:09, February 2, 2018 (UTC)
 * The topic is worthy, but would be best handled within the article Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or one of its child articles about mass surveillance, given how tightly connected those matters are. Nemo 07:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow close. This was very recently discussed here, and nothing has changed.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  07:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow close per Casprings and Anarchyte. Master of Time   ( talk ) 08:42, 2 February 2018 (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.