Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Russian interference in the 2018 United States elections


 * 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. As sources presented say, this is already happening, so WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply. ansh 666 05:56, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Russian interference in the 2018 United States elections

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As likely as it may be, the reality is that the title is misleading as the elections haven't actually happened yet so this is pretty much as crystal ball-y as it gets. Is it likely? Sure. Guaranteed? No. Unlike other subjects usually falling into crystal ball territory (ie. new singles from musicians) this is really just an assumption. No objection to recreation once/if there is confirmation. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  20:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment It seems to me that this is precisely what WP:CRYSTAL was written to cover: Articles that present original research in the form of extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are inappropriate. Although scientific and cultural norms continually evolve, we must wait for this evolution to happen, rather than try to predict it. Of course, we do and should have articles about notable artistic works, essays, or credible research that embody predictions. An article on weapons in Star Trek is appropriate; an article on "Weapons to be used in World War III" is not.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:58, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 21:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete as per nom. This is pure speculation about a narrative many people will be interested in promoting regardless of the facts. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 22:03, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Textbook WP:CRYSTAL violation. Jdcomix (talk) 22:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. per WP:CRYSTAL. Ajf773 (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Per multiple WP:RS the Russian interference is already happening. See:
 * Russia Is Already Trying to Undermine the 2018 Elections, Top Spies Say
 * The nation’s top spies said Russia is continuing to target the U.S. political system
 * Given that WP:RS report that it is already happening, WP:CRYSTAL does not apply. Second, even if it did, per WP:CRYSTAL, "expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." Given the previous and widely reported Russian interference in the US elections, this is an expected event that is almost certain to take place. Because this clearly meets WP:N and this is already occurring, this is a clear keep.Casprings (talk) 00:55, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You've literally just explained why WP:CRYSTALBALL applies here...this isn't a yearly event or any type of multi-year event. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  01:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * So it we use WP:CRYSTAL for an event that is occurring? Odd.Casprings (talk) 01:12, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You can't claim interference has happened in the 2018 election when the election itself has not yet happened. Trying /= doing. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  01:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * They tried in 2016. That is notable. As are their current reported efforts. WP:RS's report that "Russian hackers are already scanning American electoral systems, intelligence officials have said, and using bot armies to promote partisan causes on social media." Current actions being done by a state are both WP:N and not WP:CRYSTALLBALL.Casprings (talk) 01:19, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * We really can't debate about things that have not yet happened. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  01:29, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You can about the interference. That is an event to itself and is already occurring. As such, WP:CRYSTALBALL does not apply to an event that is already going on, per multiple WP:RSes. It is that simple.Casprings (talk) 01:34, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It's still speculation and only that but we'll see what the AfD outcome is. CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  01:36, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:CRYSTAL doesn't apply to events that are already happening, . I think it was early to create this article now, but if you delete it, it will be back with new sourcing in less than three months, and I think that everyone knows that. So deleting now would be pointless WP:NOTBURO. Geogene (talk) 01:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Jumping the gun a little here. Hard to have a article on something that cannot happen yet for another almost 2 years. Maybe take a look in a year and half and try again. WP:CRYSTAL seems to fit since it cannot of happened yet, it cannot be verified in any meaningful way. PackMecEng (talk) 02:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you're talking about. The midterm election is in November; that's what this article is about. Geogene (talk) 02:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I'm silly. New year and all. Still has not happened yet. PackMecEng (talk) 02:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * But the election is not merely when folks enter the polling place and cast a ballot. In all our election-related articles we discuss events months or years prior to the day of the balloting.  SPECIFICO talk 00:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah for normal things that we know are going to happen. An article for the elections themselves would make sense and does not violate crystal because of item 1. But this is a maybe might kind of happen with impacts that are very difficult to almost impossible to determine, especially before the election actually happens. PackMecEng (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * According to the mainstream sources that covered the Senate hearing, the unanimous assessment is that the interference has already been monitored by the US. The article does not predict the effect this will have on the outcome, and in fact even the 2016-related article -- where we know that such interference did occur -- offers only some opinions as to that. If the title were "meddling" or "screwing with" would that make it easier to acknowledge that this topic is about something that's already occurred and ongoing?  SPECIFICO talk 00:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I could go for "Russia screwing with the 2018 United States elections" but that's just because it makes me smile. How about this, just merge the info in this article into United States elections, 2018. If it out grows a section there maybe a stand alone article would work. PackMecEng (talk) 00:38, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I would ask you to relook your vote of WP:CRYSTAL, given that the interference is currently occurring, according to WP:RSes and US intelligence. I find it hard to accept a WP:CRYSTAL vote when WP:RS are either reporting that it is occurring or reporting that US intelligence believes it is occurring.Casprings (talk) 13:15, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * But the election hasn't happened yet. There's no reason to speculate on something that may or may not occur. Just because they say it might happen doesn't mean it will. Per WP:CRYSTAL, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented." Jdcomix (talk) 13:47, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * User:Jdcomix But WP:RSes are not saying it might happening. They are saying it is currently happening. This makes logical sense because you don't wait to interfere in an election until election day. You do it now, which is the point. It is hard to accept WP:CRYSTAL when WP:RSes are stating that the action is currently happening. Its just not a logical argument. You can disagree with WP:RSes and believe that it isn't currently occurring. That is fine and, if those views are represented in WP:RS, can be included in the article. However, if WP:RS are reporting that the actions are currently occurring, I still do not see how you can argue WP:CRYSTAL.Casprings (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You've already argued this, but even if this might be true, there's not enough RS coverage to warrant a separate article when this can easily be merged with Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. I simply don't see the point of keeping this article until it actually happens. Jdcomix (talk) 14:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thats fine. Then are argument is about WP:N and not WP:Crystal. That is my point. If the argument is about WP:N, the subject has widespread coverage and there is enough for an article. I understand the article needs to be expanded (if the end result is keep). I plan on doing that. However, the WP:RS coverage is there.Casprings (talk) 15:01, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - The article's creator has a knack for creating political articles that are regularly deleted. Notability cannot be determined for something that may very not exist in the future so, for the time being, we must presume there is no sign of notability.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Which pages are you making reference to? I have created pages but the vast majority are still around. I would ask you to AGF. I would also note that we judge WP:N by coverage by WP:RS. In this case, the coverage by WP:RS is certainly there.Casprings (talk) 17:56, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I wasn't assuming anything else other than good faith. It is a statement of fact: a 41.9% deletion ratio is a very telling statistic. Editors shouldn't have to waste time having these discussions to delete articles on topics you -- and largely you alone -- claim are notable; by now you should understand our notability guidelines, especially if you are going to work on current events (or, umm, possible events). You can claim we have RS but all I see is crystal-balling and news, both of which fall under what Wikipedia is not.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Many of these are deleted to make way for moves. Nunes Memo for example. Most of the others are from years before.Casprings (talk) 18:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * While the literal election hasn't happened yet, the campaigning is happening, and russia looks to influence that with advertisements disinformation etc and that is what is mean by interference in the election. It is happening right now so crystal isn't applicable as far as I can see. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:50, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete – The hysteria must stop some day. When Russia really attacks, nobody will believe it… — JFG talk 22:56, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * We really can do better than to weasel-smear the National Intelligence professionals of the US by casually calling their official warnings to Congress "hysteria". I don't understand what the second sentence ("when Russia really attacks...") has to do with our work here as WP editors.  SPECIFICO talk 23:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not smearing anybody, just having fun. My second sentence refers to The boy who cried wolf. In all seriousness, the warnings about US midterms are just run-of-the-mill US-news-of-the-day that do not warrant a dedicated article just yet. We don't have Russian interference in the 2017 French presidential election or Russian interference in the Brexit referendum, although that got a lot more press coverage in their days. — JFG talk 23:52, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh my, we do have a Russian Brexit interference article already! Golly… Quick, all aboard the nuclear fallout shelters! Les femmes et les enfants d'abord! — JFG talk 23:52, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep We have seen widespread RS reports of the use of Russian social media posts, bots, and seeding of "likes" and "retweets" to amplify recent US social discord on various topics -- recently the Russian bot promotion of false narratives concerning the Nunes memo. As is increasingly reported now in RS, candidates are positioning themselves for key congressional races in the 50 states and the issues are increasingly defined by the preponderance of chatter on social media and other channels the Russians are known to have corrupted. Like all beginning articles, this one will grow and its focus will become clear with time.  But the references and the facts they document already satisfy our notability criteria for a new article.  SPECIFICO talk 23:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And it's not Wikipedia's job to take a position in US political affairs. WP:RGW etc. — JFG talk 23:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:CRYSTALBALL. The sources say that six heads of intelligence agencies expect Russia to interfere, not that they have yet.  Since it was only reported in the news yesterday, there is insufficient material for notability.  There is also a weight problem, since it is too soon to know the degree of acceptance in reliable sources.  While this subject may merit an article, maybe even soon, it's best to delete for now, per WP:BLOWITUP as it is easier to create a good article than to improve a poor one.  TFD (talk) 00:56, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment – The ultimate source of this speculation is the DNI "Worldwide Threat Assessment" report, which contains only one sentence mentioning mid-term elections, among a 28-page report. A very terse sentence too: The 2018 US mid-term elections are a potential target for Russian influence operations. Definitely not worthy of an article. — JFG talk 01:07, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That and the testimony (https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-worldwide-threats-hearing-1) where multiple people, nominated by Trump and confirmed by a Republican Senate, stated over and over again that these efforts were ongoing. Please don't leave that out. I will add a transcript of that to the article once it posts.Casprings (talk) 01:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hearing happened February 13, that's WP:RECENTISM. If this subject becomes big enough in a few months, there will be time for an article. Until then, a one-line mention in United States elections, 2018 is largely sufficient. Please review WP:TOOSOON as well. — JFG talk 02:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please review WP:N, as a quick search of WP:RS will confirm the standards are present with this article. The attached document you provided is Director Coats opening statement for the hearing I linked.Casprings (talk) 02:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Notability will be assessed by our fellow editors during the AfD. Note that notability of a subject in itself doesn't automatically justify a dedicated article. Again, speculation on Russian interference would be better placed in the relevant election article. — JFG talk 02:25, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. And the WP:N should be judged by the standards set forth and WP:CRYSTAL is not the relevant policy for this discussion. I have no problem with the article being judged by the standards of WP:N.Casprings (talk) 02:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment It's really not helpful to get comments from editors who have not read the sources cited in the article, let alone looked at other readily available sources on the subject, let alone kept up to date with the news reports and published analysis of the subject that mainstream sources have presented for the past 3-6 months. No, it's not about somebody's prediction when RS tell us this interference is currently being monitored. It's not just about one news story or about one intelligence report. Please review the available reference material.  SPECIFICO talk 01:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * .....The point that everyone is trying to make is that there aren't enough reliable sources saying that it's happening, and the election hasn't happened yet, which violates WP:CRYSTAL. Jdcomix (talk) 03:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Everyone? Please. <b style="color: #0011FF;"> SPECIFICO</b> talk 05:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * For a second, lets disregard that the inference is ongoing according to WP:RSs. Your use of Crystal seems to depend on "the election hasn't happened yet". Election day hasn't happened yet. The election is currently happening. In America, it is just a matter of fact that our elections are LONG. Filling dates for candidates have passed. The Primaries election days start in March. Campaigns are already in full swing. The election itself is happening currently. An election is far more then the day you go vote.Casprings (talk) 15:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Vacillating here. Elections are normally very short in Australia. And I don't know what filling dates are. The articles itself says that "The United States Intelligence community has assessed that Russia is preparing to interfere" and that "this is going to happen."  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:04, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The sources support that the interference is ongoing. Therefore I changed the opening sentence.Casprings (talk) 19:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per Casprings. It is already happening and warnings have already been raised by top intelligence officials, so it is pointless to delete per Geogene. The subject is obviously covered extensively in reliable outlets. Davey2116 (talk) 05:08, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's already a decent stub with decent huge growth potential, and we keep them. -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:30, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Enough coverage for N, crystal doesn't apply as we're saying what reliable sources are saying and the campaigning for the election is happening right now, which russia is interfering in. Tillerson's warning was on Feb 6. Galobtter (pingó mió) 06:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep -It is already happening at the local level according to RS, it appears this story will only grow as the election nears. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 12:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is not WP:CRYSTAL because page describes events (scanning, etc.) that allegedly had already happened. My very best wishes (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Present and former top intelligence chiefs and SoS Tillerson all agreeing that Russia will interfere in the mid-term elections in November, Dan Coats saying that he has already "seen evidence Russian was targeting" them and also that they never stopped TIME, NYT, CNN, Atlantic, Reuters, WaPo, even Fox News - stay tuned! Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep There is no requirement for this article to be a retrospective as some here seem to imply. There is already a large amount of significant coverage about methods which have been used, are being used and will be used by Russia to interfere in the US political process. CRYSTAL does not apply. Jbh  Talk  17:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep as per WP:SIGCOV, which topic already has, as do many 2018 election related pages.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment For those of you who are not familiar with the US election process ( you mentioned you were from Australia) they are long drawn out affairs. Not the relatively short things you see in most Parliamentary Democracies like Australia or the UK. Typically they start after the last 'filing day' ie the last day a candidate can officially declare their candidacy. (Although there may be campaigning/political activity before then especially by PACs and a great deal of 'interference' targeting the election can go on at this time as well.) Then there is the campaign for the party nomination which, depending on the office and state, can last a couple of months and ends with a 'primary election'. In the primary, depending on rules which vary, the entire electorate or only party members vote to select a party candidate. Following that there is more campaigning, again over months, until the general election where a winner from among the various party candidate is selected. To say the election is not being held and the Russian direct action which currently ongoing is not 'interference in the 2018 election' is a fundamental misunderstanding of the US election process. Interference, as happened in 2016, starts well before even the primaries because selecting who will be running in the General election can have a very strong effect on the final outcome. The election is going on right now.  Jbh  Talk  21:56, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, meets WP:GNG with plenty of good sources ps. not all OZ editors are igorant of US electoral process (although some aspects can be baffling:)) pps. might be nice to have some words about this added to Foreign electoral intervention. Coolabahapple (talk) 20:18, 18 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.