Talk:Wikipedia coverage of Donald Trump

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia coverage of Donald Trump article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Template:WikiProject Donald Trump

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Wikipedia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Noting

Per title of article, there is a 2004-2014 gap in content. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's any sources about Trump's article from 2004 to 2014. Wow (talk) 20:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Wow Thanks for expanding this article. I've started a couple discussions below, if you're interested. Also, curious if you have plans to nominate the entry for Good article status? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the page creator @ElijahPepe should nominate this for GA since most of my edits involve archiving the sources and organizing the content. Wow (talk) 18:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not ready for good article status. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 00:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Necessary detail?

Right now the "Articles loosely related to Trump" section says, "In October 2016, a vandal replaced the contents of both Hillary and Bill Clinton's article with a pornographic image and explicit message encouraging readers to vote for Trump."

The articles about Bill and Hillary Clinton are not about Trump. All I'm getting from the text is that someone vandalized Wikipedia by encouraging votes for Trump.

Is this necessary detail? If not, I suggest removal. Or, perhaps this is more appropriate for the Vandalism section? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just expanded this detail, but we can move it out of the section if necessary. --Wow (talk) 22:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Dot

Right now the Wikimedia Commons section is based on an article published by The Daily Dot.

WP:DAILYDOT says, "There is no consensus regarding the general reliability of The Daily Dot, though it is considered fine for citing non-contentious claims of fact. Some editors have objected to its tone or consider it to be biased or opinionated; there is community consensus that attribution should be used in topics where the source is known to be biased or when the source is used to support contentious claims of fact. Consider whether content from this publication constitutes due weight before citing it in an article."

I see The Daily Dot is used as an inline citation twice. Appropriately? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]