Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prime Minister of the United States (3rd nomination)


 * 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 DELETE. postdlf (talk) 01:53, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Prime Minister of the United States
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article is mostly original synthesis. As the article points out, there is no prime minister of the US, and the title has been occasionally used satirically, or incorrectly by foreigners. While there are several references showing individuals being referred to or referring to themselves by this title, there is no significant coverage of the title itself in reliable sources, leading to the overall concept of this article failing the general notability guideline. Anthem 11:09, 11 June 2011 (UTC) Revert AfD nomination of sockpuppet, see WP:Banning policy. Unscintillating (talk) 07:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - how did this survive previous deletion debates? There is no Prime Minister of the United States and the occasional usage or misusage of the terms a handful of times over the course of more than two centuries of American history doesn't warrant inclusion. Harley Hudson (talk) 12:49, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is full of original research, synthesis and unreferenced claims. The one inline reference (that Obama was once called the Prime Minister by a foreign newspaper, is broken as are some of the external links. The occasional joking reference to Dick Cheney or some other functionary as a "Prime Minister" does not justify an encyclopedia article about a nonexistent office. Fails notability and verifiability. Edison (talk) 00:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - There is a ton of work that remains to be done in the field of US history on Wikipedia. Clearly this page is the product of a talented content creator. This is an original essay, though, and that's a nunt-uh... Nobody is going to be searching this phrase anyway, it's a non-starter. So, kudos for the effort and here's hoping the creator dusts themselves off and goes on to great things at Wikipedia. Carrite (talk) 01:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 20-Mule-Team Delete: Well ... this survived the VfD in 2003 because the process, at the time, was crap, and all manner of turgid rationales were given equal time in what was, then, nothing more than a head count. It survived the AfD in 2008 because the closing nom dropped the ball, IMHO, and gave such stellar rationales such as "article has some structure and content, example has hundreds of google hits. There are far more unnotable topics around at WP," "Most countries in the world have a prime minister," "The material is interesting," "Office obviously doesn't exist but term is notable" equal weight with the obvious retorts that this is a non-existent office for which not a single damn source is proffered, reliable or otherwise. Of course, no sources exist which might discuss the subject in the "significant detail" required, and and the article is chockful of WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH and WP:SOAPBOX violations ... if it avoids WP:BULLSHIT outright, which I don't believe it does. Keeping this once was a matter of blindness.  Keeping it twice was a travesty.  Keeping it again would be insanity.   Ravenswing  06:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. We don't need an article for an ironic turn of phrase.  In this case, even worse, the turn of phrase is not particularly common, nor is the article sourced.  If someone wanted to do OR on it, then an outlet outside Wiki would be better.TCO (talk) 12:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - although there is some interesting information here I agree its mostly original research and subjective analysis. --Kumioko (talk) 13:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - as it only serves to confuse. We don't have President of Canada, President of the United Kingdom, President of Australia etc etc. GoodDay (talk) 13:55, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak delete: Appears to be a mashup of largely unrelated facts. However, it probably should be redirected to something  Purpleback  pack  89  ≈≈≈≈  16:04, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Occasional mentions of the term as a sort of neologism does not a Wikipedia article make. First Light (talk) 16:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. & others, as well as WP:OR & WP:SYNTH. It's an essay, not an encyclopedic article.--JayJasper (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note Anthem of joy has been indef blocked as a sockpuppet of Claritas . --Tothwolf (talk) 03:05, 15 June 2011 (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.