Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump Force One

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Astro interest (talk | contribs) at 22:10, 27 April 2016 (change to merge). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Trump Force One

Trump Force One (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's "coverage", but as an article subject, completely non-notable. Content can be replicated into the article on Donald Trump. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:38, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, also say no to causing trouble Unfortunately, the nominator of the AFD is in a heated argument with me so this should be speedily closed and reopened only if another editor submits it. Keep because it has notable coverage as the PRIMARY topic of several articles, not just a passing reference. Most private planes do NOT have coverage but this one is very special and does meet WP guidelines. Whiskeymouth (talk) 05:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Doesn't meet notability guidelines. Include in article on Trump. VanEman (talk) 06:37, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Article subject has significant coverage in multiple reliable resources, and thus meets WP:GNG. As per Whiskeynouth, the timing of this AFD is a bit suspect. Nominator should take care to follow WP:BEFORE. I feel the nomination should either be withdrawn or closed as speedy keep. AFD is no place to start drama because one may be in a dispute with another editor. Please let us judge articles on their own merit. Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant (talk) 11:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please discuss articles and edits, not editors. When one chooses the opposite, that's when drama starts. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 12:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant. Unfortunately, per WP:AfD guidelines, an AfD nom cannot be withdrawn once a Delete !vote has been cast, which VanEman cast above your withdrawal request. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 17:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong, replicating it to the Donald Trump article would create a firestorm because he is running for President. It would be considered so different from his biography that it would be considered pointed to add. Try adding the cars that Hillary drove to her article and it will be speedily deleted from the article. No, don't mix politics and Wikipedia. Whiskeymouth (talk) 03:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Whiskeymouth: Thank you so much for your expansive, and illuminating, answer as I most certainly didn’t think of the political ramifications regarding this article. Picomtn (talk) 07:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm not sure where I've expressed my opinion on this matter. Can you please provide a link? --Eleassar my talk 18:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Eleassar: Sorry about that, I mixed you up with the nominator for deletion of this article while I was at the same time talking to you about another one. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 07:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the Daily Mail source (as painful as it is, it satisfies GNG). I would discount sources that are newer than a year or so as WP:INHERITED coverage of Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, but that does not empty the reference section. Not much opposition to a merge and redirect to Donald Trump, but the target article is one of those from the "permanently too long" category. Standalone notability + no good way to merge = article. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:06, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Per below, there is however a potential merge target at List of things named after Donald Trump. I still think keeping as standalone is better, but I am less sure now. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – and expand with any solid references among all those references. The batch of references in the References section needs to be refactored to be inline, or they are nearly meaningless and at this point acting as a defacto bibliography. For the number of editors involved in this article, it is poorly written, and poorly constructed, but that is not grounds for deletion. Needs a good dose of WP:BEFORE and WP:ATD. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 17:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the above. I agree that a merge would probably be better overall, but the Trump article itself is a monster. So this is a clear keep. Maybe look at it again once the election hubbub dies down? UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 17:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. It's notable. And this appears to be a bad faith request. FHB7695 (talk) 19:28, 22 April 2016 (UTC) (account has been blocked as a sockpuppet)[reply]

  • Keep but reconsider title merge into List of things named after Donald Trump - I didn't even know this article existed... : it seems "Trump Force One" was simply a whimsical name coined by the media that has been repeated. There seems to be little indication that Trump himself (or indeed anyone other than a dozen or so political journalists) is referring to the plane by this name. astro (talk) 21:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What would be a better title? That seems to me to be the WP:COMMONNAME for it, even if not the official name. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete' actually as I myself would've closed this as SNOW keep given the current AfD state but I will have to say Delete because none of this is actually suggesting solid and permanent independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 23:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not notable. --Ches (talk) (contribs) 09:03, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete - Seriously, a plane owned by a millionaire warrants itself an article? No, it shouldn't, most likely it should be put onto Donald Trump's personal page. What doesn't make sense is that references 7-26 aren't anywhere in the article (which is the majority of references that apparently make this pass WP:GNG), in fact those references either poke fun at Trump, talk about his plane with no in depth coverage (or don't even talk about this plane), or are just photos of the plane. I suspect WP:NOT. Lastly, Mr. Trump has a fleet of aircraft at his possession, so what makes the Boeing 757 significantly more notable than the other fleet? Adog104 Talk to me 14:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment We have a List of individual aircraft which includes quite a few privately owned or business planes. This is the single plane which Trump has been using to get around in this campaign cycle, not the rest of his "fleet" (which by the way consists of two helicopters and a tiny cessna-like thing). astro (talk) 15:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to his campaign he was using a private Cessna aircraft a lot (which is the one that was grounded recently) mostly in short term travel. When scanning the list also, most or all of the aircraft were either there because they were the first to do something or the first to break a record. The only aircraft that I could relate the Trump One to was The Starship; however that aircraft was the first Boeing 720 used for commercial use and then purchased by Led Zepplin for the use of other musicians, which is credible. Adog104 Talk to me 16:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
None claimed that notability is inherited from the owner. The fact that some or most of the sources are not GNG material is irrelevant, as long as some of them are (WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP). And while I hate the Daily Mail as much as every sensed person, this is detailed coverage from an independent and reliable source. TigraanClick here to contact me 08:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete with all of the coverage of Trump that I have seen (and I have seen a lot - I am fascinated by this presidential campaign), the aircraft does not really feature; the coverage is along the lines of "he projects an image of being a man of the people but he gets around in a big-ass plane", or "he says his plane is bigger than Air Force One but it isn't". There is nothing remarkable about a tycoon having a large aircraft. The late Kerry Packer owned a Douglas DC-8; Rupert Murdoch had a Boeing BBJ for years and Reg Grundy owns a BBJ; John Travolta owns a Boeing 707; Roman Abramovich has a Boeing 767; and Larry Page and Sergey Brin share another one. Ted Cruz has been using an airliner during his campaign; Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton have both been heavy users of private jets in their campaigns. YSSYguy (talk) 01:22, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Is it ACTUAALLY named Trump Force One?? or is that just media hype? A non-notable aircraft. Mention could be made on DT's page but no need for a full-blown article on a subject that has virtually no direct references!! WP:GNG, plus who the hell cares!!--Petebutt (talk) 03:25, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Who cares what the "official" name is (if it even has one)? TigraanClick here to contact me 09:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A fair plan. Not sure if that exists, but we do have List of things named after Donald Trump. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment at the moment, the "article" Trump Force One is basically a dictionary definition: "Trump Force One is a Boeing 757-2J4ER that is the personal aircraft of Donald Trump, powered by Rolls-Royce RB211-535E engines." A significant proportion of that sentence is padding, as is the rest of the "article" - why would anyone who isn't an aviation-fanboy care to know which airlines it flew with, or what kind of engines it has, or that it can't be tracked on the websites of Flightaware et al. (which is pretty common for corporate jets anyway - Greg Norman's plane can't be tracked, nor can Nike's, or News Corporation's, or John Travolta's, just to name four)? Does anyone think Wikipedia needs to document its interior fitout? At the risk of being howled down with OTHERSTUFF and so on, compare that with WP's coverage of another Boeing 757, Ed Force One, about which much more has been written than Trump's 757. YSSYguy (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Trump_Force_One&oldid=717469470"