- 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 redirect to Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012#Vice-presidential selection. And use editorial discretion to determine how much to merge from the history. "Delete and merge" is not possible because of attribution requirements. Sandstein 07:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Vice presidential candidacy of Paul Ryan
- Vice presidential candidacy of Paul Ryan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Paul Ryan's vice presidential candidacy is simply not notable outside of Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign. The only similar page to this is Vice presidential candidacy of Sarah Palin, but I think she's a unique phenomenon. – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu ( talk) 01:51, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Keep or List "...
Sarah Palin, but I think she's a unique phenomenon". In today’s climate of Political Correctness, can we possibly assert that one VP candidate is more unique by exceptions as simple as perceived sex or intellectual prowess as the primary divisor? I beg not! Perhaps a LIST would be more the predilection.
Nikto
wha? 02:59, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't say anything about her gender or intellectual prowess. Palin's selection and the coverage it generated makes it notable. Ryan's doesn't. "Political correctness" has nothing to do with this. –
Muboshgu (
talk) 03:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- "Uniqueness" has quality. Therefore, we can draw segregates in it's definition. Segregates more than imply distinction, and our current political climates do follow the many lines of those distinctions be it implied, intentional, or otherwise. As to VP vacuity, the attention garnered Dan Quayle's "Potatoe" of the same period gleaned much media, along with other asides. Michigan Republican Sen. Zachariah Chandler of Andrew Johnson surely made news when attributed; "The inauguration went off very well except that the Vice President Elect was too drunk to perform his duties and disgraced himself and the Senate by making a drunken foolish speech. I was never so mortified in my life, had I been able to find a hole I would have dropped through it out of sight." The 800lb gorilla in the room was simply Sarah got media. Sarah's attempts at media were sometimes awkward, and perceived as misinformed - i.e. "The Bridge to Nowhere" Gravina Island Bridge. There is no need to state the gorilla weighs 800lb's. However, Sarah is certainly not alone where politics become noteworthy, or PC. Nikto wha? 04:11, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't say anything about her gender or intellectual prowess. Palin's selection and the coverage it generated makes it notable. Ryan's doesn't. "Political correctness" has nothing to do with this. –
Muboshgu (
talk) 03:39, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia ( talk) 07:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia ( talk) 07:02, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete and merge Muboshgu is correct. The vice-president runs on the ticket alongside the front-running presidential candidate. I'd argue that Sarah Palin's candidacy wasn't notable either, but that's neither here nor there.--
TM 12:25, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- A historical listing is practical, and preserves a readily accessible information stream for future reference. Identifying a VP candidate as a sole construct of the Presidential candidate in an election is a misstatement. There would be no sense in a protracted choice for VP if they don't they exist outside the Pres candidate. In political history, the VP choice was frequently positioned from the opposing party to garner support to swing the election. Perhaps you were not aware of the
Democratic-Republican Party, the
National Union Party, or the
Whig Party and their platforms/affiliations/candidates? Did you know
Thomas Jefferson,
John Adams, and
Theodore Roosevelt were VP candidates? Were their platforms and ideas important to history? You may not see a VP as anything but a spare tire, but every time one has to assume office you think differently - just ask
Lyndon Johnson (
Vietnam War) or
Gerald Ford (
Klutz).
Nikto
wha? 17:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- I really don't get what your point is through all of these comments. TJ and Adams were never "VP candidates", they were runners up in the presidential election back when the U.S. Constitution said that the VP was the second place finisher in the presidential election. And TR and LBJ had no platforms as VP candidates, because they had signed on to the platform of the presidential nominees, McKinley and Kennedy respectively. Paul Ryan had no platform in 2012. Sarah Palin did have "going rogue". – Muboshgu ( talk) 20:58, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- A historical listing is practical, and preserves a readily accessible information stream for future reference. Identifying a VP candidate as a sole construct of the Presidential candidate in an election is a misstatement. There would be no sense in a protracted choice for VP if they don't they exist outside the Pres candidate. In political history, the VP choice was frequently positioned from the opposing party to garner support to swing the election. Perhaps you were not aware of the
Democratic-Republican Party, the
National Union Party, or the
Whig Party and their platforms/affiliations/candidates? Did you know
Thomas Jefferson,
John Adams, and
Theodore Roosevelt were VP candidates? Were their platforms and ideas important to history? You may not see a VP as anything but a spare tire, but every time one has to assume office you think differently - just ask
Lyndon Johnson (
Vietnam War) or
Gerald Ford (
Klutz).
Nikto
wha? 17:48, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Totally agree with the nom. Of all the US Presidential elections we have just two of these pages. This is clearly not independently notable. AusLondonder ( talk) 20:54, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete or Merge w/ Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012#Vice-presidential selection. Per nom., the coverage of Ryan's v.p. candidacy does not exceed that of the coverage routinely given to v.p. candidates. Independent notability not established.-- JayJasper ( talk) 21:24, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge to Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012#Vice-presidential selection, which could use expansion. If, against the doubts expressed here, it turns out that within that broader topic, due WP:WEIGHT calls for that section to grow substantially and dominate the article, we can spin it out. I agree with most others here, however, that per WP:NOPAGE it makes more sense to cover there (and at the Paul Ryan page, of course). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:30, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- Merge to Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012#Vice-presidential selection per Rhododendrites. This page has lots of sourced information not on the other page.---- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 03:43, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete and Merge to Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012#Vice-presidential selection without a redirect, since Ryan has no actual Vice Presidential campaign. Unless/until he's actually named by the Presidential candidate. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 00:15, 12 July 2016 (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.