Talk:Donald Trump

Highlighted open discussions

• None

NOTE: It is recommended to link to this list in your edit summary when reverting, as:
[[Talk:Donald Trump#Current consensus|current consensus]] item [n]
To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to .

01. Use the official White House portrait as the infobox image. (Dec 2016, Jan 2017, Oct 2017, March 2020) (temporarily suspended by #19 following copyright issues on the inauguration portrait, enforced when an official public-domain portrait was released on 31 October 2017)

02. Show birthplace as "Queens, New York City, U.S." in the infobox. (Nov 2016, Oct 2018, Feb 2021) "New York City" de-linked. (September 2020)

03. Omit reference to county-level election statistics. (Dec 2016)

04. Superseded by #15

Lead phrasing of Trump "gaining a majority of the U.S. Electoral College" and "receiving a smaller share of the popular vote nationwide", without quoting numbers. (Nov 2016, Dec 2016) (Superseded by #15 since 11 February 2017)

05. Use Trump's annual net worth evaluation and matching ranking, from the Forbes list of billionaires, not from monthly or "live" estimates. (Oct 2016) In the lead section, just write: Forbes estimates his net worth to be [$x.x] billion. (July 2018, July 2018) Removed from the lead per #47.

06. Do not include allegations of sexual misconduct in the lead section. (June 2016, Feb 2018)

07. Superseded by #35

Include "Many of his public statements were controversial or false." in the lead. (Sep 2016, February 2017, wording shortened per April 2017, upheld with July 2018) (superseded by #35 since 18 February 2019)

08. Mention that Trump is the first president elected "without prior military or government service". (Dec 2016)

09. Include a link to Trump's Twitter account in the "External links" section. (Jan 2017) Include a link to an archive of Trump's Twitter account in the "External links" section. (Jan 2021)

10. Canceled

Keep Barron Trump's name in the list of children and wikilink it, which redirects to his section in Family of Donald Trump per AfD consensus. (Jan 2017, Nov 2016) Canceled: Barron's BLP has existed since June 2019. (June 2024)

11. Superseded by #17

The lead sentence is "Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is an American businessman, television personality, politician, and the 45th President of the United States." (Jan 2017, Jan 2017, Jan 2017, Jan 2017, Jan 2017, Feb 2017) (superseded by #17 since 2 April 2017)

12. The article title is Donald Trump, not Donald J. Trump. (RM Jan 2017, RM June 2019)

13. Auto-archival is set for discussions with no comments for 14 days. Manual archival is allowed for (1) closed discussions, 24 hours after the closure, provided the closure has not been challenged, and (2) "answered" edit requests, 24 hours after the "answer", provided there has been no follow-on discussion after the "answer". (Jan 2017) (amended with respect to manual archiving, to better reflect common practice at this article) (Nov 2019)

14. Omit mention of Trump's alleged bathmophobia/fear of slopes. (Feb 2017)

15. Superseded by lead rewrite

Supersedes #4. There is no consensus to change the formulation of the paragraph which summarizes election results in the lead (starting with "Trump won the general election on November 8, 2016, …"). Accordingly the pre-RfC text (Diff 8 Jan 2017) has been restored, with minor adjustments to past tense (Diff 11 Feb 2018). No new changes should be applied without debate. (RfC Feb 2017, Jan 2017, Feb 2017, Feb 2017) In particular, there is no consensus to include any wording akin to "losing the popular vote". (RfC March 2017) (Superseded by local consensus on 26 May 2017 and lead section rewrite on 23 June 2017)

16. Superseded by lead rewrite

Do not mention Russian influence on the presidential election in the lead section. (RfC March 2017) (Superseded by lead section rewrite on 23 June 2017)

17. Superseded by #50

Supersedes #11. The lead paragraph is "Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is the 45th and current president of the United States. Before entering politics, he was a businessman and television personality." The hatnote is simply {{Other uses}}. (April 2017, RfC April 2017, April 2017, April 2017, April 2017, July 2017, Dec 2018) Amended by lead section rewrite on 23 June 2017 and removal of inauguration date on 4 July 2018. Lower-case "p" in "president" per Dec 2018 and MOS:JOBTITLES RfC Oct 2017. Wikilinks modified per April 2020. Wikilink modified again per July 2020. "45th" de-linked. (Jan 2021)

18. Superseded by #63

The "Alma mater" infobox entry shows "Wharton School (BS Econ.)", does not mention Fordham University. (April 2017, April 2017, Aug 2020, Dec 2020)

19. Obsolete

Following deletion of Trump's official White House portrait for copyright reasons on 2 June 2017, infobox image was replaced by File:Donald Trump Pentagon 2017.jpg. (June 2017 for replacement, June 2017, declined REFUND on 11 June 2017) (replaced by White House official public-domain portrait according to #1 since 31 Oct 2017)

20. Mention protests in the lead section with this exact wording: His election and policies have sparked numerous protests. (June 2017, May 2018) (Note: In February 2021, when he was no longer president, the verb tense was changed from "have sparked" to "sparked", without objection.)

21. Superseded by #39

Omit any opinions about Trump's psychology held by mental health academics or professionals who have not examined him. (July 2017, Aug 2017) (superseded by #36 on 18 June 2019, then by #39 since 20 Aug 2019)

22. Do not call Trump a "liar" in Wikipedia's voice. Falsehoods he uttered can be mentioned, while being mindful of calling them "lies", which implies malicious intent. (RfC Aug 2017, upheld by RfC July 2024)

23. Superseded by #52

The lead includes the following sentence: Trump ordered a travel ban on citizens from several Muslim-majority countries, citing security concerns; after legal challenges, the Supreme Court upheld the policy's third revision. (Aug 2017, Nov 2017, Dec 2017, Jan 2018, Jan 2018) Wording updated (July 2018) and again (Sep 2018).

24. Superseded by #30

Do not include allegations of racism in the lead. (Feb 2018) (superseded by #30 since 16 Aug 2018)

25. In citations, do not code the archive-related parameters for sources that are not dead. (Dec 2017, March 2018)

26. Do not include opinions by Michael Hayden and Michael Morell that Trump is a "useful fool […] manipulated by Moscow" or an "unwitting agent of the Russian Federation". (RfC April 2018)

27. State that Trump falsely claimed that Hillary Clinton started the Barack Obama birther rumors. (April 2018, June 2018)

28. Include, in the Wealth section, a sentence on Jonathan Greenberg's allegation that Trump deceived him in order to get on the Forbes 400 list. (June 2018, June 2018)

29. Include material about the Trump administration family separation policy in the article. (June 2018)

30. Supersedes #24. The lead includes: "Many of his comments and actions have been characterized as racially charged or racist." (RfC Sep 2018, Oct 2018, RfC May 2019)

31. Do not mention Trump's office space donation to Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/Push Coalition in 1999. (Nov 2018)

32. Omit from the lead the fact that Trump is the first sitting U.S. president to meet with a North Korean supreme leader. (RfC July 2018, Nov 2018)

33. Do not mention "birtherism" in the lead section. (RfC Nov 2018)

34. Refer to Ivana Zelníčková as a Czech model, with a link to Czechs (people), not Czechoslovakia (country). (Jan 2019)

35. Superseded by #49

Supersedes #7. Include in the lead: Trump has made many false or misleading statements during his campaign and presidency. The statements have been documented by fact-checkers, and the media have widely described the phenomenon as unprecedented in American politics. (RfC Feb 2019)

36. Superseded by #39

Include one paragraph merged from Health of Donald Trump describing views about Trump's psychology expressed by public figures, media sources, and mental health professionals who have not examined him. (June 2019) (paragraph removed per RfC Aug 2019 yielding consensus #39)

37. Resolved: Content related to Trump's presidency should be limited to summary-level about things that are likely to have a lasting impact on his life and/or long-term presidential legacy. If something is borderline or debatable, the resolution does not apply. (June 2019)

38. Do not state in the lead that Trump is the wealthiest U.S. president ever. (RfC June 2019)

39. Supersedes #21 and #36. Do not include any paragraph regarding Trump's mental health or mental fitness for office. Do not bring up for discussion again until an announced formal diagnosis or WP:MEDRS-level sources are provided. This does not prevent inclusion of content about temperamental fitness for office. (RfC Aug 2019, July 2021)

40. Include, when discussing Trump's exercise or the lack thereof: He has called golfing his "primary form of exercise", although he usually does not walk the course. He considers exercise a waste of energy, because he believes the body is "like a battery, with a finite amount of energy" which is depleted by exercise. (RfC Aug 2019)

41. Omit book authorship (or lack thereof) from the lead section. (RfC Nov 2019)

42. House and Senate outcomes of the impeachment process are separated by a full stop. For example: He was impeached by the House on December 18, 2019, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. He was acquitted of both charges by the Senate on February 5, 2020. (Feb 2020)

43. The rules for edits to the lead are no different from those for edits below the lead. For edits that do not conflict with existing consensus: Prior consensus is NOT required. BOLD edits are allowed, subject to normal BRD process. The mere fact that an edit has not been discussed is not a valid reason to revert it. (March 2020)

44. The lead section should mention North Korea, focusing on Trump's meetings with Kim and some degree of clarification that they haven't produced clear results. (RfC May 2020)

45. Superseded by #48

There is no consensus to mention the COVID-19 pandemic in the lead section. (RfC May 2020, July 2020) (Superseded by RfC Aug 2020)

46. Use the caption "Official portrait, 2017" for the infobox image. (Aug 2020, Jan 2021)

47. Do not mention Trump's net worth or Forbes ranking (or equivalents from other publications) in the lead, nor in the infobox. (Sep 2020)

48. Supersedes #45. Trump's reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic should be mentioned in the lead section. There is no consensus on specific wording, but the status quo is Trump reacted slowly to the COVID-19 pandemic; he minimized the threat, ignored or contradicted many recommendations from health officials, and promoted false information about unproven treatments and the availability of testing. (Oct 2020, RfC Aug 2020)

49. Supersedes #35. Include in lead: Trump has made many false and misleading statements during his campaigns and presidency, to a degree unprecedented in American politics. (Dec 2020)

50. Supersedes #17. The lead sentence is: Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is an American politician, media personality, and businessman who served as the 45th president of the United States from 2017 to 2021. (March 2021), amended (July 2021), inclusion of politician (RfC September 2021)

51. Include in the lead that many of Trump's comments and actions have been characterized as misogynistic. (Aug 2021 and Sep 2021)

52. Supersedes #23. The lead should contain a summary of Trump's actions on immigration, including the Muslim travel ban (cf. item 23), the wall, and the family separation policy. (September 2021)

53. The lead should mention that Trump promotes conspiracy theories. (RfC October 2021)

54. Include in the lead that, quote, Scholars and historians rank Trump as one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. (RfC October 2021)

55. Regarding Trump's comments on the 2017 far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, do not wiki-link "Trump's comments" in this manner. (RfC December 2021)

56. Retain the content that Trump never confronted Putin over its alleged bounties against American soldiers in Afghanistan but add context. Current wording can be altered or contextualized; no consensus was achieved on alternate wordings. (RfC November 2021) Trump's expressions of doubt regarding the Russian Bounties Program should be included in some capacity, though there there is no consensus on a specific way to characterize these expressed doubts. (RfC March 2022)

57. Do not mention in the lead Gallup polling that states Trump's the only president to never reach 50% approval rating. (RfC January 2022)

58. Use inline citations in the lead for the more contentious and controversial statements. Editors should further discuss which sentences would benefit from having inline citations. (RfC May 2022, discussion on what to cite May 2022)

59. Do not label or categorize Trump as a far-right politician. (RfC August 2022)

60. Insert the links described in the RfC January 2023.

61. When a thread is started with a general assertion that the article is biased for or against Trump (i.e., without a specific, policy-based suggestion for a change to the article), it is to be handled as follows:

1. Reply briefly with a link to Talk:Donald Trump/Response to claims of bias.
2. Close the thread using {{archive top}} and {{archive bottom}}, referring to this consensus item.
3. Wait at least 24 hours per current consensus #13.
4. Manually archive the thread.

This does not apply to posts that are clearly in bad faith, which are to be removed on sight. (May 2023)

62. The article's description of the five people who died during and subsequent to the January 6 Capitol attack should avoid a) mentioning the causes of death and b) an explicit mention of the Capitol Police Officer who died. (RfC July 2023)

63. Supersedes #18. The alma mater field of the infobox reads: "University of Pennsylvania (BS)". (September 2023)

64. Omit the {{Very long}} tag. (January 2024)

65. Mention the Abraham Accords in the article; no consensus was achieved on specific wordings. (RfC February 2024)

66. Omit {{infobox criminal}}. (RfC June 2024)

67. The "Health habits" section includes: "Trump says he has never drunk alcohol, smoked cigarettes, or used drugs. He sleeps about four or five hours a night." (February 2021)

Trump's Middle Eastern brokering

Moved from my Talk page for discussion.

Violation of editing restrictions on Donald Trump You have violated the following editing restriction: "If an edit you make is reverted you must discuss on the talk page and wait 24 hours before reinstating your edit." Self revert immediately. Also the significance for his life and Presidency is that the Accords were his major foreign policy success during his time as President and led to him getting recognition as a pro-Israel President. You know, literally what the sources all say?! Davefelmer (talk) 15:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Dave, FWIW, you seem to do a lot of tough controversial edits to article text w.o. getting talk page consensus. This is likely to be frustrating and unproductive. I suggest you do the right thing and try to gain talk page buy-in. RS do not elevate this to the level you claim, IMO. SPECIFICO talk 16:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Davefelmer, I'll self-revert if I have violated the 24-hr BRD cyle but I'm not sure who's in violation here.

• You added this text.
• I partially reverted it.
• You reinserted the reverted text without discussing it on the Talk page and waiting 24 hours.
• Another editor reverted the same text.
• A second editor partially reverted the first editor.
• I reverted the second editor.

On second thought: Are you counting my self-revert for the purpose of providing a better edit summary and the repeat of my initial reversion of the second editor as a revert falling under the 24-hr BRD cycle? Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

I would say this is not yet a significant enough event for us to say it is part of his lasting legacy.Slatersteven (talk) 17:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Not wishing to stray into WP:OTHERSTUFF territory, but This article is fill of things less significant than the Abraham accords. I think the sole argument to their exclusion is establishing his degree of personal involvement. Their notability and impact here in the middle East shouldn't really be in question. https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+abraham+accords&safe=strict&client=ms-android-samsung-gs-rev1&prmd=inv&sxsrf=ALeKk02sdy4fAkPuSY7xwFEi-KF-K0GT5g:1617817681936&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiGw_jB2OzvAhXOYcAKHXkfByoQ_AUoAnoECAIQAg&biw=384&bih=724Pipsally (talk) 17:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

And I am not sure that two wrongs make a right. This article should be about him, not his presidency.Slatersteven (talk) 18:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

What matters is the consistency, the article is rife with content about his presidency, it's literally almost his entire lead and most of the body! You can't arbitrarily decide to enforce a standard now that is not reflected in 90% of the article. The only question based on the consistency of this article and other articles for major political figures and ex presidents is the notability element, which as his major foreign policy achievement it absolutely is, both to his presidency and himself. Davefelmer (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Your search appears to have produced mostly opinion pieces from right-wing and/or Republican-affiliated sources. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 13:32, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is to be mentioned here at all, there really needs to be a reality check..how the Accords were largely a face-saving nothingburger for all parties, how the Palestinians and Iran were marginalized in the discussions as well. In short, yes, a political boon to Mr. Trump at the time, but it accomplished precious little. There may be some quotes to mine from several Brookings Institution fellows here... Around-the-halls: Experts analyze the normalization of Israel-UAE ties. Zaathras (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

I recall commenting on this in a previous discussion where I posted multiple articles (from the NYT and USA Today among others that I can't remember) that called these developments in no uncertain terms the most significant policy achievement of his administration. User:Slatersteven, I am curious if you have perhaps come across newer articles (as if I remember right the last time I looked at this was many months ago) which do not consider it significant, and I can't find the last discussion in the plethora of archives here to confirm. Back to general discussion (not directed at Slatersteven or anyone in particular) I think we need to remember that our guidance here is on what reliable sources say about the significance, not what we personally think it is - and thus it would be a good idea for us to start compiling lists of sources that call them "significant" or "face-saving nothingburgers" (or similar) so we can make a determination based on what a majority of reliable sources say. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:00, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

I am saying its too early to judge its lasting impact (or even if it has any meaningful impact) or to determine just how much he was personally responsible.Slatersteven (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Slatersteven, forgive me for pinging you back but I hadn't seen this until now. I agree that it's too early - but reliable sources have taken to calling this one of the most significant (and some even call it the most significant) foreign policy achievement of his time in office, and as such, it should be included here if his foreign policy is discussed in this article. There is an argument that none of it should be included yet (both for article size reasons as well as too soon), but if any is included, this needs to be per RS characterization as the most significant. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:48, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Which ones?Slatersteven (talk) 18:49, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I can't find the previous discussion (and don't have links saved right now) but I pointed out quite a few at the last time this was discussed months ago - maybe someone better at searching archives (it was on this talk page) can find that and link it here, alternatively I'll try and find such sometime in the next few days. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

• The Gulf states weren’t and never had been at war with Israel, they had informally normalized their relations with Israel for years, and now Kushner reportedly is writing a book about how he helped to negotiate the non-peace deals. (Also—apparently—how he generally saved America but that's off-topic here.) For now the event is only a signing ceremony for vaguely worded ("pursue a vision of peace") self-promotion of some autocrats outside the White House which—honi soit qui mal y pense—had absolutely nothing to do with Trump’s reelection campaign. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 13:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

How is he not considered a politician?

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/politician?q=politician

If Andrew Yang and Kanye West can be considered politicians on their articles, two persons who have never held elected office, why can the same not be said for a former US President? He meets the dictionary definition of the word, see above.

DeaconShotFire (talk) 06:13, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Two wrongs do not make a right, so if other articles make mistakes its not a reason for this one too.Slatersteven (talk) 09:36, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

You say, while neglecting to respond to the fact that he meets the dictionary definition of the word. He is also in fact still referred to as a politician at the top of this talk page. And could you please explain how those other 2 articles are mistaken? DeaconShotFire (talk) 09:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

"politician /pɒlɪˈtɪʃ(ə)n/ noun a person who is professionally involved in politics, especially as a holder of an elected office." Professionally, as in it's your job, you are paid to do it. So as Trump made much of "I will not take a salary" https://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-donald-trump-say-hed-refuse-to-take-a-salary-as-president/ he was not a professional politician. As to the others, this is not the place to discuss then=m.Slatersteven (talk) 09:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Source? politician noun - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes | Oxford Advanced American Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com as linked above has "a person whose job is concerned with politics, especially as an elected member of a legislature (= governing body)" with no requirement to be paid, your CBC link makes no such requirement but, to the contrary, states "Trump wouldn’t be the first president to forgo a salary. According to Snopes.com, he would be joining John F. Kennedy and Herbert Hoover, who both donated their entire presidential salaries to charity." Are you claiming that JFK and HH were not politicians, or indeed that they were entitled to say they weren't? . . dave souza, talk 13:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

He DID take his salary, as he was constitutionally required to do. Like three other (rich) presidents before him, he donated it. He'll continue to get paid for the rest of his life plus the funds for office staff and space (wonder how much rent Trump's Mar-a-Lago charges Trump's office?). The total could be around $1 million per year. He hasn't announced that he'll forgo any of those entitlements or donate equivalent amounts to charity. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 11:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

My point was he made much about how he was not a politician.Slatersteven (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

And you believe him because? Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 11:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Becaue I agree with him, the one thing he is not and never was is a politician. But beyond that anything I say is OR, soapboxing and (maybe) a BLP violation.Slatersteven (talk) 11:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

He most assuredly was a politician for at least his term of office. And I would include his 2016 campaign as well. Whether he was a more or less "normal" politician or a "good" politician may be discussed, but it cannot be denied that he was a politician. --Khajidha (talk) 17:41, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

The wording of the first sentence was decided per consensus a month ago. I actually agree with you but IMO it's too early to start another discussion. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 11:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Focusing on the payment issue here is arch semantics. Someone who has held the office of President is clearly and demonstrably a politician. He may not have been a good one, or a typical one, but he's one none the less Pipsally (talk) 10:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

From the links above, the most we could say is that he presents himself [or claims] to not be a politician. . . dave souza, talk 13:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Of course he was (or is) a politician, but it's redundant to call him one when we call him the president, and he has never held another office. Kolya Butternut (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Kolya Butternut, that's a decent point. He's a grifter, and politics was just one of his (short-lived) grifts. Guy (help! - typo?) 19:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Guy, that is completely subjective and not relevant. DeaconShotFire (talk) 21:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Guys, I can't see if the user who opened this discussion signed off with their username, but I agree with them that this is a really important point. Regardless of your political affiliation, it's absurd to reference a United States president's past occupations before his role as a world leader in their wiki bio. For example, Ronald Reagan was a hugely famous Hollywood actor before his own presidency -- which is directly comparable to Trump's fame before his own rise to office. Now, look at Ronald Reagan's lead from his article: "Ronald Wilson Reagan (/ˈreɪɡən/ RAY-gən; February 6, 1911 – June 5, 2004) was an American politician who served as the 40th president of the United States from 1981 to 1989 and became a highly influential voice of modern conservatism. Prior to his presidency, he was a Hollywood actor and union leader before serving as the 33rd governor of California from 1967 to 1975." I think Trump's should also follow this format. Long story short, his role as President of the USA is obviously what the bio should lead with. Note how it doesn't say "Ronald Reagan was an actor who served as US President from..." How do we decide on this, other than just fighting over it in the talk page? Can we have a vote? Gossamers (talk) 16:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Reagan was a politician for 16 years.Slatersteven (talk) 16:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

We did have an RfC about this, but one option that was left out was "Donald John Trump (born June 14, 1946) is the 45th President of the United States, serving from 2017 to 2021. Before entering politics, he was a businessman and media personality. Kolya Butternut (talk) 17:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

"Reagan was a politician for 16 years". Yep. And he was an actor for 28 years, between 1937 and 1965. Gossamers (talk) 18:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

So, the point is Reagan had a long political career, he was not a one presidency wonder.Slatersteven (talk) 09:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The Reagan article is badly written. Let's not copy it.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

"The Reagan article is badly written." Uh, what? It's one of only 5,916 featured articles out of 6,282,564 articles on the English Wikipedia (about 0.1% or one out of every 1,060 articles). As for the "one presidency wonder" thing -- the point is that if someone rose to become a *world leader*, then that's obviously their most notable achievement, and thus should be how you lead the article. I see where you're coming from, but you're quite clearly downplaying the significance of becoming a president.Gossamers(talk) 20:30, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kolya Butternut: It wasn't an RfC, it was a discussion of 10 options that—per the closer's remarks—did not reach consensus on whether the term "politician" should also be included in a first sentence that has a structure akin to that of choice A. The closer was mistaken in stating that adding "politician" was an idea some editors pitched during the middle of the discussion. It was first added as an option by Sdkb two hours after the discussion was started, at a time when three other discussions of the same matter were ongoing and several editors were opposed to starting another one per se as well as to the format of the fourth one. Trump may not be a "career politician" or a "professional politician" but he's been active in populist politics for decades. Maybe it's time to have that RfC. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 13:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, well I think we should first find biographies to see if they use the word. Kolya Butternut (talk) 14:35, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

From the first 20 or so results in a Google search (there’s more but I got sidetracked by the Daily Mail reporting on Trump visiting Trump Tower for two days in early March in his Trumpforce One, a Cessna). They all say that he's a politician, albeit not a normal, typical, coherent, seasoned politician.

• Reuters: "businessman-turned-politician"
• Trump on himself: "I’m not a typical politician"
• Vanity Fair: not a "coherent politician"
• BBC: "defied all predictions to beat much more seasoned politicians"
• WaPo: "Politician" is in the eye of the beholder. If Donald Trump's fans behold a guy who isn't a politician, who is he to complain? He'll just sit there quietly, acting, getting things done.
• Politico: political Godzilla in exile, not a "normal politician." Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 18:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

I would focus on biographies:

• Britannica does not use "politician".
• Biography.com does not call him a "politician".

Kolya Butternut (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia, not Encyclopedia Britannica or biography.com. Britannica appears to apply the label politician somewhat selectively. They don’t use it for former presidents Trump, Obama, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Reagan, and Carter but they do use it for George H.W. Bush. They don’t use it for former Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton but they do use it for former Senator and Secretary of State John Kerry. As for "biography.com", they don’t call Obama and George W. Bush "politician", either, but they are the go-to source if you want to know their zodiac signs (Gemini, Leo, Cancer). Also, the article contains too many factual errors and omissions and is too poorly written to be taken seriously.Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 10:43, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

So these encyclopedias demonstrate that "politician" is rarely needed. Kolya Butternut (talk) 13:21, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I mean, he's not considered a professional actor, either, even though he's technically had more movie gigs than his one single-term political office. Just because you dabble in something for four years doesn't make it a career. 2600:1700:24d0:2ca0:fc83:b05b:444:fa0c (talk) 05:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC) (added signature, not sure if this is the way to handle missing signature. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 12:38, 17 April 2021 (UTC))

It's an issue of repetitive redundancy. Since he is a politician because he was president, we don't need to say both that he was a politician and president. It would be different if he had gone the approved route, starting as a local elected official, then moving through the ranks, becoming a governor or senator and finally president. TFD (talk) 14:48, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

• I'm utterly unsurprised to see this. Of course he's a politician, since he was president of the United States, which makes you a politician. And of course we should include that fact in the lead. The large discussion referenced was so terribly organized (see the comment I made early on in it) and so divided that it has very little precedent-making power, and I think the closer erred in trying to conjure a consensus out of what was really just a complete mess. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:55, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

  Why should we include that redundant information in the lead? What do RS biographies write? Kolya Butternut (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

It's a redundant descriptor. You literally cannot be a president without being a politician. He's labelled as a president in the lead: what benefit is there from also labeling him as a politician? — Czello 17:39, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Um—did you not read the opinions above and elsewhere saying that he is not a politician? Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 18:54, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

In theory, Lloyd Austin could become president without ever running for any office or joining any party, if six politicians ahead of him simply die fast enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, he is a politician. That doesn't necessarily mean the lede sentence should say it. I'm not re-hashing the last lead discussion now. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

He was a politician..refer to Aristotle regarding the difference between a politician and civil servant 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Suggested addition to Post-presidency section.

A New York Times article was released in February 2021 stating that President Biden barred President Trump for receiving intelligence briefings out of office. I would like to suggest that this be added to the “Post-presidency” section of the article, as all other living former presidents do receive briefings.

Here’s a link to the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/us/politics/biden-trump-intelligence-briefings.html?fbclid=IwAR2coyi8JTSi_EhapllBje7OE2l7vuPFUk0XxmoYHHHIvlnkM2C1A1JuxAE LordVesuvius (talk) 18:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Why? Is this something unique to him?Slatersteven (talk) 18:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

To my knowledge, he is the only living former president to be denied access to intelligence briefings. The other living former presidents can decline them, but only Trump has been denied them. LordVesuvius (talk) 18:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Do we have any sources for this claim?Slatersteven (talk) 18:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I have links to various articles on the subject, but I am unable to post them here.

LordVesuvius (talk) 18:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Why not? can you at least not tell us where to look?Slatersteven (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

For some reason when I tried to, I got a message saying “cannot publish edit” or something along those lines. And you can Google “do former presidents receive briefings?” and you should be able to find the information that way. LordVesuvius (talk) 19:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Maybe you're finding very dodgy sources that are automatically blocked? Try looking them up in WP:RSN archives.
Don't know about this google thing, but Duckduckgo brought up * Cammarata, Sarah (17 January 2021). "Trump should be denied intelligence briefings, Schiff says". POLITICO. Retrieved 12 April 2021. which would be usable, though not up to date. Interesting who thought T is a security risk. . dave souza, talk 22:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

It’s a possibility. But would the addition to the post-presidency section be acceptable? The source I have is from the New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/05/us/politics/biden-trump-intelligence-briefings.html LordVesuvius (talk) 00:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes please add if for no other reason he`s been out of office for over 90 days and people want to know what his deal is..I do anyway...yes this is relevant..he`s created a whole new world of lunacy and it would be nice to know that there is at least someone out there who has tried to keep him from doing more harm..the world needs to know what he`s on like that`s ever going to come out 2600:1702:2340:9470:E0AC:CD44:4802:427 (talk) 20:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Suggestion: Add COVID-19 Recession (and possibly COVID-19 death toll) to Paragraph 4 of Article

In paragraph 4 of the article, the part that details President Trump's reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic (in the sentence after his appointments of Supreme Court justices), it should include a sentence about how the pandemic led to an economic recession that led to President Trump leaving office with fewer jobs than when his term began. This detail about the economy is crucial, because the recession itself played a big role in Trump losing re-election. Additionally, should there also be a sentence about how 400,000 Americans died of COVID-19 by his final day of office? Please consider making these additions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captainamerica099 (talk • contribs) 13 April 2021 20:27:43 (UTC)

This is a biography of a person, not an article about his presidency, nor the recession, etc. The sentence about his reaction is there because it directly involves him (his reactions). Your suggested addition is not about Trump the person - it's about COVID/the presidency/administration. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 21:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add them but put it in the lead...the only thing anyone is going to remember about him is he took us a generation backwards and got a lot of innocent people killed along the way..best to get it out there now before he slithers away back into the hole he climbed out of...the mob is fickle and no one is going to give a damn about trump and soon 2600:1702:2340:9470:E0AC:CD44:4802:427 (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

China virus / racism

Can we add a paragraph under the racism section on how his reference to the "China virus" was racist and may have contributed to asian hate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.223.155.114 (talk) 17:34, April 13, 2021 (UTC)

There is already something on Trump's sinophobia here and much more at Racial views of Donald Trump. Can you please provide reliable sources to support that Trump's language then is directly linked to a rise in asian hate crimes in general now? And please sign your posts. Mgasparin (talk) 01:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Well no, calling a virus by the country it's from isn't racistPyromilke (talk) 01:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

The preponderance of reliable sources say otherwise. Zaathras (talk) 02:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Show me an unbiased reliable source.Pyromilke (talk) 12:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I can show you Wikipedia being completely OK with "colloquially" calling out South Africa for The Thing from Nelson Mandela Bay, or casually blaming Brazilians for spreading "Lineage P.1". InedibleHulk (talk) 06:27, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Good point 2600:1702:2340:9470:9CAE:A2B9:9362:D8CC (talk) 02:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Discrepancy with Racial views of Donald Trump article

In the main article, it states: "Many of his comments and actions have been characterized as racially charged or racist.", but the Racial views of Donald Trump article begins with: "Donald Trump, the former president of the United States, has a history of speech and actions that have been widely viewed by scholars and the public as racist or white supremacist."

Should the statement in the main article be changed to what is said in the Racial views of Donald Trump article, or vice versa? Isi96 (talk) 03:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes Ev666 (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm not seeing a contradiction here, so I don't see why either should change.--Khajidha (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Where's the discrepancy? The main article says "characterized as racist" while the racial views article says "viewed as racist". Both articles basically say the same thing but with slightly different words. Mgasparin (talk) 23:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

I think that it's important that child articles and parent articles are the same but not exactly so - and I, like the two people who have commented here before, do not see how the short (14 word) summary in this article is not an accurate summarization of the child article linked therein, thus I see no need for any change. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 18:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree 2600:1702:2340:9470:9CAE:A2B9:9362:D8CC (talk) 02:29, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Lead length

The prose of this article is pretty long,with over 6 paragraphs (5 if you exclude the starting sentence). Many we can tighten it up? 4 paragraphs is the ideal number for an article of this scale. Blue Jay (talk) 02:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

What would you propose to cut from this article? Mgasparin (talk) 06:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

What do you mean by " prose " ? 2600:1702:2340:9470:E0AC:CD44:4802:427 (talk) 20:41, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Blue Jay seems to be talking about the lead section which, according to Wikipedia's guidelines, does overrun the suggested four-paragraph maximum for an introduction. On the other hand, that's not an ironclad rule, and there was a hell of a lot to discuss, even in brief, from the last presidency. WhampoaSamovar (talk) 13:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I've fixed the section title. As a very long and high-profile article, I'm fine with 6 paragraphs. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Fugitive?

Is Trump a Fugitive? I see no detail in article but it has the following category: >Category:Fugitives wanted by Iran Some please verify and delete Category as needed. Thanks, SWP13 (talk) 04:18, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I found this reference from NPR. The red notice doesn't really seem that notable for this article though. There are already so many other things we can talk about other than a warrant from another country. Mgasparin (talk) 06:47, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

It's not just "another country", it's Iran, we already have a Foreign policy subsection named for this very sort of international relationship complication. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

No he is not.Slatersteven (talk) 12:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Depends on whose looking for him..I say he is 2600:1702:2340:9470:E0AC:CD44:4802:427 (talk) 20:19, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

We know who wants him, and his biography already has a paragraph about the man he killed to become a wanted man. If I was capable of simply citing statements, one simple sentence on the consequences of blowing up another country's national hero would be simple. Simple for someone else, I still insist. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:12, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

No. He is not a fugitive.--Jack Upland (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Then how do you explain the warrant for his arrest on suspicion of murder, ten months in effect? He's not running away from INTERPOL. But if he ever wants to visit Iran, he's damn sure gotta slip in through the unmarked sewer entrance disguised as a cloud, or he's going to jail. That's a fact, Jack. He's only "bulletproof" or "Teflon" domestically (but pretty much safe in Canada and Norway, too). InedibleHulk (talk) 06:02, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Exactly. He's not running away.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:27, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Laying low counts as evasion. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

If Trump ever lays low — well, let me know.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I just did, so this isn't working out between us, I'm hanging up. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

He is not in hiding, he is not on the lam, he has not had a request for extradition made against him.Slatersteven (talk) 08:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Exactly. This is ridiculous.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

The US has formally designated the proper Iranian authorities a Foreign Terrorist Organization, and informally "refuses to negotiate with terrorists", what do you expect, teamwork? InedibleHulk (talk) 08:59, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Exactly, he is neither "a person who has escaped from captivity or is in hiding". It does not matter why this is the case, what matters is he does not fit the definition of fugitive.Slatersteven (talk) 09:02, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

He knows he's wanted. He could and arguably should turn himself in (with a GOOD lawyer). But he remains harboured, safely. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

So? It does not matter if he is wanted, to be a fugitive he must be fleeing and hiding, he has done neither. Nor is he being harboured, it is just that Iran has made no formal request for his extradition. This is just political theatre on the part of Iran and has no place being given credence by us unless RS say he is a fugitive.Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Again, the US and Iran have no formal extradition system between them. Same as how Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya didn't with America, but you wouldn't say their former leaders weren't wanted by the foreign country. Or maybe you would, somehow. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Again, that is irrelevant to be a fugitive he must be on the run, not, not being on the run. Being a fugitive and being wanted are not the same thingSlatersteven (talk) 09:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

The second sentence of Fugitive says you're mistaken. Maybe it's mistaken. Can you offer any differences between a "wanted person" and a "fugitive"? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:48, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

A. Wikipedia is not an RS, B. No it does not, as Trump is not "taking refuge in a different country in order to avoid arrest", as he is (in fact) a resident (and citizen) of the USA (and in fact has left to go to other countries as well, and I am not sure he has ever actually even been to Iran), nor is he "hiding from law enforcement in the state". Drop this silliness please, this is going to be my last word on this.Slatersteven (talk) 09:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Two good points, I concede to you. He's also taking refuge in America to avoid familiar domestic media and state process servers, and is mainly refusing to visit Iran because he's heard it's one of "those shithole countries" that keeps "children in cages" with "murderers and rapists" always "invading" from Iraq and "crossing in caravans" from Afghanistan. Same reason Bush and Obama could surrender, but "just don't wanna". InedibleHulk (talk) 10:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Laughable and irrelevant to Trump's bio. Iran's "warrants" are political theater, and carry no weight at all. Zaathras (talk) 13:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

This. Reliable sources rightly so give no weight to that warrant when talking about it beyond the "routine" coverage of covering it briefly when it first came out. Even in the small amount of coverage that it has received, many sources go to extra lengths to clarify that it's a political warrant, not a legitimate criminal warrant. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 20:21, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Are these reliable sources generally pro-America and anti-Iran? If so, fair enough to bury this for POV reasons. But the warrant is verifiable and active, and the story about the underlying crime in Trump's foreign policy section is thus plainly incomplete and falsely suggests this suspected terrorist was given impunity by everyone (for better or worse, arguably). InedibleHulk (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

• I thought this was done, because the thread topic was on including two specific categories (Category:Fugitives wanted by Iran and Category:Fugitives wanted by Iraq), and the overwhelming consensus is to not include them. They certainly aren't "defining" attributes of Trump. The categories were removed from the article over 24 hours ago, and while one editor insists on continuing to argue on whether Trump is a "fugitive", there's no argument here regarding Wikipedia policy suggesting these categories should be in the article. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Category or no, I've added the relevant info to the relevant section, using a story from NPR, an outlet already considered reliable there. Missing the URL, can't paste. Any mitigating factors or excuses within are fair game, too, if desired. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:23, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I've already fixed the ref. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. To be clear, re "covering it briefly when it first came out", I used the the NPR story from last June. Not the one above from six months later. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:28, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

This depends on your point of view..it`s not like he is ever going to be free to move around openly like let`s say Semion Mogilevich 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 22:37, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't see how this pertains to the persistent RS coverage. I also don't know who that is. But I added an Ebrahim Raisi declaration from Mgasparin's link above, more help citing? InedibleHulk (talk) 22:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Don`t know who is ? 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 23:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Mogilevich (but have since dipped my toe, thanks for Wikilinking). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you..he`s as deep in it as Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin sure hope I don`t disappear 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 01:01, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

If either of those ostentatious overblown oligarchs give you any grief, tell 'em the Hulkster says you can stay, brother! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:07, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks..nice to know there are still a few stand up guys out there..spam for everyone 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 01:16, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

"Many of his comments and actions have been characterized as racially charged or racist."

Can we also add misogynistic too? I feel like we should put something in the lead that says Many of his comments and actions have been characterized as racially charged and misogynistic. Ak-eater06 (talk) 20:17, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

It seems obvious to me it should be..why isn`t already worded that way? 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 22:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

We already have too much of a Litany of Sins in the lead section. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:23, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

What does that mean in English ? What are you really trying to say..that trump is not a misogynist or that it`s not a character flaw ? 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 22:33, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

It means that we don't have to list every negative trait about the man in the lead section. Just mathematically, we have only 4-6 paragraphs, and I'm sure there are at least 15 paragraphs of negative material to write about the man. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 22:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Do any RS say that "many of his comments and actions have been characterized as mysogonsitc"? The point is he used dog whilstes as a campighn strategy (which is what many RS claim), I am n9ot sure they havcwe said the same about him using mysogony to win votes.Slatersteven (talk) 09:02, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely. BBC is the top Google result, but there's a litany of RSP-greenlit sources to choose from. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Not a forum
Except that these are two of the most relevant along with being a pathological liar and an unapologetic reactionary 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 23:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Off-topic, WP:NOTFORUM. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Don't forget stupid. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:34, 23 April 2021 (UTC) Also funny looking. PackMecEng (talk) 23:39, 23 April 2021 (UTC) And politically incorrect. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:44, 23 April 2021 (UTC) And incorrectly political. PackMecEng (talk) 00:01, 24 April 2021 (UTC) Boorish and UnAmerican, dammit. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC) cowardly drug addict hold up in a gated " community " ? wonder how is golf game is going..can`t wait for the book 2600:1702:2340:9470:8883:4B26:17AB:9CB3 (talk) 01:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC) We're talking about his commonly characterized comments and actions here, not the man himself, keep it clean? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:20, 24 April 2021 (UTC) Indubitably my good friend. PackMecEng (talk) 00:07, 24 April 2021 (UTC) Wha-wha-what?!? InedibleHulk (talk) 00:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC) I'll be your dream, I'll be your wish, I'll be your fantasy? PackMecEng (talk) 00:14, 24 April 2021 (UTC) I think a comma could be everything that you need. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:18, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• Support. Allegations about Trump's misogyny have been thoroughly documented and have received a comparable level of media attention to those relating to his racism. There is room in the lead for one additional word, and I strongly disagree with 力 that the fact that the information is negative in a lead with other negative information already present somehow means it should not be included. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree..it needs to be in the lead in addition to the allegations of sexual misconduct against minors 2600:1702:2340:9470:ECAE:6827:C0A:C280 (talk) 23:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Racist or Prejudice?

When I think of racism, it is a stronger form of prejudice where someone considers one race superior to another. Prejudice (pre-judgement) is "An unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason. Any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable. Unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group." Growing up, my generation was taught a very firm distinction between the two terms. I wholeheartedly, undoubtedly think Trump pre judges people based on race, religion, sex, gender, etc. He'll kick you out of a country but he wouldn't take it to the extremes. He's a fast talker from the 50's-80's and that is simply not the same thing.Jawz101 (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Please read wp:or and wp:soap.Slatersteven (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

In my generation and growing up in JIM CROW south..I was taught differently..it`s essentially the same thing..it is to me anyway 2600:1702:2340:9470:ECAE:6827:C0A:C280 (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Trump website

The official Trump post-presidential website is 45office.com. Why is it not listed? Ajlipp (talk) 06:09, 29 April 2021 (UTC)