Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump Campaign—Russian meeting

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2017 July 15.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Withdrawn by nominator. Bishonen | talk 11:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trump Campaign—Russian meeting

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

~~Wrong year. Revelations were in July 2017, not July 2017. Wrong title. Meeting itself was in June 2016, not July 2017. Empty page. No content whatsoever to speak of beyond one sentence.~~ NOTE: Without prejudice to recreation or even a proper article itself. Sagecandor (talk) 21:46, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the process of expanding it. This just needs a page move, not a deletion. Don1182 (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "Keep", below. Sagecandor (talk) 02:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Clearly notable. The OP is an argument for a move, not a delete. I have already moved the page to Trump Campaign—Russian meeting.Casprings (talk) 22:40, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Nothingburger of the day #4872. Call me up if anybody remembers this by Christmas. — JFG ^talk 22:42, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. The point of this deletion nom is now moot. The page has been retitled. It has enough notable, sourced information to keep. It just needs expanding. Frankly, I don't think a page should be nominated for deletion within a matter of minutes after it is created, at least not without discussing with the person who created it. Sundayclose (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - WP:NOTESAL MSM has been retracting nothingburgers as fast as the golden arches sells quarter pounders w/cheese. Hopefully WP won't get caught-up in the fake news syndrome that is synonymous with MSM pundits. ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:10, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was unaware that Donald Trump Jr.'s tweets are "fake news"... DARTHBOTTO_talk•cont 03:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you understand the difference between "pundits" and investigative journalists? This is not a "nothingburger" in any way and no chance of retraction since it is 100% true and Don Jr. confirmed it himself. Could you at least be informed with the basics before commenting in this discussion? You're embarrassing yourself. (Oh, and by the way, how does NOTESAL even apply here? This isn't a list!) NoMoreHeroes (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The sky is blue." "FAKE NEWS!" NoMoreHeroes (talk) 03:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're frustrated, but mind your decorum, please. DARTHBOTTO_talk•cont 03:44, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Links between Trump associates and Russian officials. Power~enwiki (talk) 23:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, arguments for deletion fail to persuade, contains reliably sourced content and has widespread notability. Darmokand (talk) 23:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election and Links between Trump associates and Russian officials, too soon to tell if this is a "nothingburger" or not, but the content is appropriate for these two articles, and unless there are more substantial (i.e. DOJ) developments, it doesn't need its own article. NoMoreHeroes (talk) 23:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Power-enwiki; not clear that there's enough here to need its own article yet, and if there is, it can always be re-expanded. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 23:56, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

comment - who was the Russian "official" in this case? ^{Atsme📞📧} 23:59, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attorney for the Russian government Natalia Veselnitskaya [1] (edit: The NY Times describe her as "a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer" the emails were one that used "Russian government attorney") WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm, she denied it - "answered “no” when asked if she had ever worked for the Russian government." per Guardian. The contradictory stories are reason enough to not publish these hot off the press nothingburgers for at least 7 days to allow the true information to surface instead of depending on MSM who are propagandizing and prostituting for ratings. I hope whoever closes this AfD considers all of the fake news and unsubstantiated propaganda, much of which is just plain wrong. It's embarrassing. ^{Atsme📞📧} 00:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, Kremin-connected is a much different and loose statement than an attorney for Russia. That's why I added in the edit to say that her(someone) working for the Russian government was just from the email. I don't see what about this is propaganda, The NYT and Guardian both indicate that she denies ever working for the Russian government, the emails released by DTjr was what claimed she was an attorney for them. I believe these articles are unnecessary as well. Everything should just be put into the investigation or Russian-links article, and stay there until one of them becomes worthy of a split, which may never happen. WikiVirusC^(talk) 01:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Um, what "fake news" are you talking about? The accurate NYT report that was confirmed by Trump Jr. himself? Please don't let your opinion on the "mainstream media" influence your judgment in this discussion. NYT is a reputable and reliable source. Though I agree she isn't exactly a Russian official, she has connections to the Russian gov and it should be appropriate enough for merger into the Links to Russian officials article, or probably the Russian interference article. NoMoreHeroes (talk) 03:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Redirect - Put information for this in to Links between Trump associates and Russian officials WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep under its new title. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:06, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 00:13, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've started a thread on the article talk page as to where this page should merge/redirect to, in case that is the outcome of this AfD. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Following Trump Jr.'s email release, this isn't just a "nothingburger" anymore.. Laurel Wreath of Victors ‖ Speak 💬 ‖ 00:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge. This content is clearly notable, but figuring out how to nail this jello to the tree may not be easy. I hate all the names so far, including the current "meeting" name (as if that were the only one) Links between Trump associates and Russian officials is getting pretty full. If you can stuff the vast majority of the content in there, it might fit nicely - but that article is close to being split up in summary style. Perhaps Russian contacts of Trump family members would make a better subtopic, not sure ... I haven't followed these stories that closely. Just don't lock up the revisions behind some admin-only magic wand, this is an organizational matter. Wnt (talk) 00:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: I am neutral on what the title ought to be, but this is such a complicated story to follow that having a wiki page develop with links, a timeline, illustrations, etc. has the potential to be of great benefit to wiki readers. KConWiki (talk) 00:56, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia. For research on what is happening on a complicated story in comprehensive detail, perhaps you can consult some other wiki. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:02, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The event involved an American campaign meeting with a representative of a foreign government to help in a campaign. That is clearly WP:N and meets the WP:10YT.Casprings (talk) 01:15, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why it should be discussed on the existing pages of Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election and Links between Trump associates and Russian officials. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:26, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No need for it's own article. Already covered in Links between Trump associates and Russian officials and Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. PackMecEng (talk) 01:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obviously notable. --I am One of Many (talk) 02:14, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:FART. And could we please have a CSD "Trumpwittery" category? - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 02:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. None of the nominator's points are still applicable. This meets the inclusion criteria, "Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources, especially if also re-analyzed afterwards (as described below)." There is no question this will impact the ongoing investigation and the political climate. It has been widely covered in diverse sources, and updates and analysis have already begun. Mattflaschen - Talk 02:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Also consider this as Withdraw nomination. Page has been significantly improved, including by Casprings. Title has been moved appropriately. Now encyclopedic amount of research on notable topic. Sagecandor (talk) 02:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Same reasons already mentioned, and mentioned on every single other one of these knee-jerk articles: WP:NOTNEWS, WP:FART, WP:10YT...take your pick.Hidden Tempo (talk) 02:57, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep: There are daily scandals with respective daily AfDs and for the most part, they get put in their place abruptly. This, however, has gone beyond the scope of what conventionally fits what is deleted and has only been escalating. Yesterday I would not have supported its inclusion and would have been content with it staying as a lengthy section of an article. But, not now that it's blown right open. DARTHBOTTO_talk•cont 03:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems notable for now. I would change the title though. Classicwiki (talk) (ping me please, I don't watch pages) 04:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Seems to come from one source which is the NYT. Probably best to merged it with Russian interference in the 2016 United States presidential election.F2Milk (talk) 07:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is WP micro-sub-page creation at its worst. This one brief meeting is adequately covered already in the subsection in the "Russian interference .." page, where it is one small part of the broader issue/story (albeit the latest piece of news therefore suddenly generating quite a bit of media noise). N-HH talk/edits 08:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.