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 an Unanimous keep. ( non-admin closure) Do the Danse Macabre! ( Talk) 16:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC) reply

List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations

List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

This article has been created against consensus. From November 21 to December 30, 2017, there was a RFC that took place over this very topic. The result was to merge this topic into Political appointments by Donald Trump as every administration official will eventually resign. Everything in this article is already listed at Political appointments by Donald Trump. Corky 16:53, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Keep the political appointments by donald trump article severely needs splitting; this can be one of the splits; the article can be renamed - " dismissals and early resignations" to counteract that other problem/ doesn't even need renaming to disinclude those before the 4 years/however many he gets. Also the formatting of Political appointments by Donald Trump is terrible, at the very least this article should be merged in Galobtter ( pingó mió) 17:06, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

The problem is, we already have a consensus and there should have been a new consensus before this page was created. "the formatting of ... is terrible" is also an opinion, which you can raise at the article's talk page. Corky 17:55, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Creating (or recreating) an article doesn't need an RfC. If you think the article creator was being disruptive, that can be dealt with elsewhere. With a few months having gone by, however, and with a relatively small turnout in that RfC, and without it ever having gone to XfD, it doesn't seem unreasonable for them to try again. The risk is that if there really is a solid consensus against having this article, it would be a waste of their time and we will see that consensus upheld here. Regardless, I do hope the circumstances of a spinout having been proposed and rejected and a new article created anyway will dissuade anyone from !voting keep only because this should happen through a merge proposal (i.e. I think AfD is reasonable). Neutral on the spinout, though. The page is big, so could probably use spinning out, and there's certainly a lot of coverage of this topic, but meh. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:38, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Talk 17:56, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Talk 17:56, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT Train ^Talk 17:56, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Keep since I think it is good compilation of Trump's dismissals. -- Seneca Quayle ( talk) 20:38, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply

• Keep - As the lede states (with multiple references), "The record-setting turnover rate in the Trump Administration has been noted in various publications." The topic is notable (as demonstrated by the wealth of in-depth coverage across the entire media spectrum) and this is a valid content fork. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹ ^Speak 22:46, 7 April 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep - Because it seems impossible for editors to put the most recent news on Trump in an already-existing article that could easily accomandate the necessary content. Perhaps, a decade from now, when the Trump presidency is a memory we can have a serious conversation on this, and other, articles. TheGracefulSlick ( talk) 01:08, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep The topic is notable and the inclusion criteria are well-defined. XOR'easter ( talk) 00:52, 9 April 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keepfefe per ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹. The comings and goings are occurring at an unprecedented rate (but there's always room for one more). Clarityfiend ( talk) 02:00, 9 April 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep: Notable topic. This could end up being a really big article. I was wondering what the count was up to now? Otr500 ( talk) 09:15, 9 April 2018 (UTC) reply
• Keep this page is about people who left the trump administration the page the list in apointments is about people who were apointed by trump and left a loy of people were not apointed by trump rather there were apointed by the cabinet members — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.55.48.195 ( talk) 17:31, 9 April 2018 (UTC) reply