Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bidenism

Bidenism

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Bidenism (edit | 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. A hoax article and WP:POINT, no such ideology. --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)