Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States presidential elections/Archive 8

Hillary Rodham Clinton move request
Greetings! A proposal has been made at Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton to change the title of the article, Hillary Rodham Clinton to Hillary Clinton. This notification is provided because this article is listed as being of interest to this project. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of 2012 United States Presidential election YouTube parodies for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2012 United States Presidential election YouTube parodies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/2012 United States Presidential election YouTube parodies until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.--NextUSprez (talk) 16:27, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

TFAR notification
I've nominated an article relevant to this project for WP:TFAR consideration, discussion at Today's featured article/requests/George B. McClellan. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Hillary 2016 campaign article already created
See Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016, just created yesterday. Isn't normal practice here to refrain from creating these campaign articles until there is actually a campaign, meaning either an official formal announcement of candidacy or at least the creation of an exploratory committee? I mean, she's not the only one who's in this state of laying the groundwork to run if they decide to run. The same can be said of Rick Perry, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, Martin O'Malley, Brian Schweitzer, and others. Seems to me creating campaign articles for any of these at this early stage fails WP:CRYSTAL. I suppose you could have "XYZ possible presidential campaign, 2016" articles, but that doesn't seem very useful in the long run. What say others? Wasted Time R (talk) 19:35, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Good question. For broader input I am going to post a link at the BLP noticeboard. My gut reaction would be that it is too soon to have a separate article but having more input would definitely help. John Carter (talk) 20:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * We can't have an article about something that has not happened yet, per WP:CRYSTAL. -  Cwobeel   (talk)  20:56, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirected to Hillary Rodham Clinton until there is a formal announcement. What's the rush? -  Cwobeel   (talk)  21:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Very bad idea to create an article for a non-existent campaign, even one that seems highly probable to occur. It sets a bad precedent and opens the floodgates for a slew of other prematurely created campaign articles, many of which will have to eventually be deleted when some of the "inevitable" campaigns never materialize.--NextUSprez (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Concur with the above. Once there is a public announcement that she'll run or the requisite legal structures are created, then fair enough.  But for now it's way too early.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 08:23, 16 June 2014 (UTC).
 * Why should there be an article about Hillary's 2016 campaign? Because our RSs say thats what it is.
 * There is precedent (HRC's 2008 campaign page, for instance, was created 5 months ahead of even her exploratory committee. So were others.) and the citations are solid. Were beat reporters being assigned to cover the Jeb Bush Campaign, were newspapers referring to it as the Jeb Bush Campaign team, were Jeb Bush events being called Jeb Bush Campaign events by the press, were Jeb Bush to have PACs, parties and delegates speaking of Jeb Bush's Campaign, then yes! There should be an article about the Jeb Bush Campaign. But at the moment they're not.
 * Maybe there should be another word in the title (presumptive? planning?) but the timing is not unusual (3 months ahead of 2008's schedule, looking back. Sounds about right with the media coverage.) and the sources back it up. Juno (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * First, the fact that other media are apparently violating WP:CRYSTALBALL doesn't mean we are obligated to as well. Certainly, there are any number of things which could happen in the future, most prominently (although regretable if it happened) Hillary could die before formally announcing her candidacy. Having said that, I could see, perhaps, under some circumstances, articles on 2016 Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential exploratory committee or something of the like, provided that there was reason to believe that topic as a stand-alone topic would be sufficiently notable and of significant enough importance to merit a stand-alone article. But, in general, I tend to think that would rarely be the case. It would certainly be possible and I think desirable to have regular updates on wikinews regarding all the presidential exploratory efforts, but that is a separate site from this one.
 * Personally, I think that this article as it stands now, as it is essentially speculative in that it deals with presumptions of individuals which are not as of yet definitively supported, is a very good candidate for deletion. I say that because, in all honesty, I find it very hard to believe in most cases that presidential exploratory teams are themselves likely to have sufficient encyclopedic content to merit separate articles, and believe that following the lead of other speculative sources is not in the best interests of the project. John Carter (talk) 15:00, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Rarely should indeed be the watchword, but this is that rarity. And we're not just talking some media here, we're talking about the NYT and Washington Post. Previous campaigns (notably HRC's 2008 campaign) were covered before the formal announcement, this falls in line with that: there are beat reporters, PACs, staff, 16m ghits for "Hillary 2016 campaign" and mountains of RSs calling a spade a spade. Juno (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree w/ others in this discussion that a campaign article at this point is premature and runs afoul of WP:CRYSTAL. The fact that the 2008 campaign article was created five months early is not a reason to repeat what IMO was a mistake and violation of WP's policies. Per NextUSprez, it also opens the door for more of these, which could get messy. May I suggest a reasonable compromise? How about tweaking the content and renaming it Draft Hillary Clinton movement. There is ample sourcing for such a movement and a precedent for such an article (e.g. Draft Ron Paul movement, Draft Bloomberg movement, Draft Condi movement, Draft Eisenhower movement).--JayJasper (talk) 17:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The major stumbling block to such a "draft" article so far as I can see is that there does not seem so far as I can see to be any sort of grassroots move to "draft" Hillary, and that the articles you link to above are all rather clearly about other people trying to persuade someone to run for office. Here, the person who seems to be at the center of any possible "draft" movement is the presumptive candidate herself. John Carter (talk) 17:43, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * See this and note that the Super Pacs such as "Ready for Hillary" are examples of draft movements.--JayJasper (talk) 18:04, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

There is a survey on going at Talk:Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2016, were you can weigh in. -  Cwobeel   (talk)  17:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Consensus to redirect reached at Talk:Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2016.--JayJasper (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Green Party presidential candidates, 2016 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Green Party presidential candidates, 2016 - which falls within the scope of this project - is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Green Party presidential candidates, 2016 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.--JayJasper (talk) 20:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Expired 2012 US election editnotices nominated for deletion
Hi WikiProject United States presidential elections. FYI, I've nominated a bunch of expired editnotices related to the 2012 US elections, for deletion. You are invited to participate in the deletion discussions here and here. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 10:36, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)