- 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 delete. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Bidenism
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bidenism ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No establishment of notability, or that this is even an actual ideology. The 1st citation doesn't define Bidenism and instead just uses it as a synonym for his presidency. The 2nd citation isn't even about his political style at all and is instead about his gaffes.
I think this article is bordering on WP:CRYSTAL as we don't even know if his ideology will be defined in such a way -- instead this looks more like a reaction to the Trumpism article. — Czello 19:58, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — Czello 19:58, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I concur. At this time it's CRYSTAL or WP:TOOSOON. I can't find anything that would establish this as notable. Also borderline WP:Neologism. If it picks up more steam and can establish itself as notable to pass our guidelines...I'm all ears - for now, it doesn't even merit a mention in the Joe Biden or Biden administration related articles, IMHO. Missvain ( talk) 20:19, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete — I concur with both nom & Missvain. This is definitely a WP:TOOSOON scenario. Celestina007 ( talk) 20:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete — Premature, at best. O3000 ( talk) 20:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. Not a term discussed at length in reliable sources; a WP:NEOLOGISM as of now. Just as likely refer to a malapropism as to a political ideology (neither of which usages meet GNG at the moment). AleatoryPonderings ( ???) ( !!!) 20:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 20:53, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete The stub is close to being a tautology, as it doesn't have any description of this alleged ideology. The two sources are about different topics, one is just about his presidency, and the other is about gaffes, similar to Bushism. This could conceivably be rewritten as an article similar to Bushism if this can be well sourced, but as it stands, the article provides no useful information. — Naddruf ( talk ~ contribs) 21:29, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete - barely any mentions of the term in RS, and the very few that exist are speculating over what Bidenism may turn out to be. TOOSOON, CRYSTAL and NEO, as others have points out, but from a look at the sources I doubt it would pass GNG anyway. Jr8825 • Talk 22:21, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete, I more agree with WP:NEOLOGISM. Alex-h ( talk) 10:25, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. It probably will be an article in four years, but it is premature now.-- Astral Leap ( talk) 10:10, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. Not a single statement in this article is factual; in fact the entire article is a fabrication and WP:POINT, simply copied from Trumpism which is something different altogether. How can Biden even "keep power" when he is not yet even president and has never attempted any coup? -- Tataral ( talk) 20:45, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment IMO, it is sad that Wikipedia is going to allow an article that talks about
Trumpism, but won't allow Bidenism. From the amount of bias I have seen (Not just this, but other places as well), it sorta looks like Wikipedia leans more to the left (liberal) side of a bias spectrum.
Elijahandskip (
talk)
15:23, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- If Bidenism had been defined and commented on, then it might be a potential article. Right now there is no information in the article about anything that may be defined as Bidenism, unless you're talking about his semi-joking statements, which are more similar to Bushism than Trumpism. If you think you can write an article about Bidenism from reliable sources, then feel free to make a draft. — Naddruf ( talk ~ contribs) 17:45, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
- @ Elijahandskip: Is that a joke comment? The reason I nominated this for deletion is because there's no indication that Bidenism is even A Thing. Contrast this article to the Trumpism article -- they're not remotely comparable. — Czello 07:49, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, this has nothing to do with politics (as in right vs left) and it's offensive that someone would even suggest it, especially as someone who gives equal time to writing and editing about politicians across all political spectrums. Kind of regretting I commented on this thread - I could speedy delete it but sadly I can't now!
Missvain (
talk)
17:43, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- It was more of a joke comment, but the part about Wikipedia (as a whole) moving more to a liberal/left stance wasn't a joke. I have had tons of discussions in the past 2 months over that issue. The comment was just about this article. Also, I didn't mean to offend anyone. Elijahandskip ( talk) 17:50, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, this has nothing to do with politics (as in right vs left) and it's offensive that someone would even suggest it, especially as someone who gives equal time to writing and editing about politicians across all political spectrums. Kind of regretting I commented on this thread - I could speedy delete it but sadly I can't now!
Missvain (
talk)
17:43, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Delete WP:NEOLOGISM. Spudlace ( talk) 01:43, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
- 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.