Welcome to the talk space of WikiProject United States presidential elections. In this area you can find discussions, notices, requests of many articles that in some way deals with presidential elections in the United States. If you would like to discuss, place a notice about, or if you have a request about, an article within the scope of this project, please include it here. If you have an interest in US presidential elections and would like to contribute, please add your name to the list of participants on the project page.
This page is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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)
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)
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)
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)