SkipCaptcha
3,995
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 223:
Line 223: + + +
Talk:Donald Trump achievements (view source)
Revision as of 11:06, June 23, 2017
, 11:06, June 23, 2017→Border patrol raid --> appropriate to add?: need criteria
:::::::JDano, achievements are achievements regardless of what they cost, and even if a court blocks it. We can note that an achievement was blocked by a court (only if the block was final -- court proceedings take a long time and are oftentimes in numerous courts). BTW, I am not differentiating the "first 100 days" (a silly date marker) from the rest of 2017. Also, just because we did not cover Obama and Bush's presidencies in so much detail, it doesn't mean we can't cover Trump's presidency in more detail. As Andy correctly stated, Obama and Bush were not as opposed by the MSM (the MSM loved Obama, and Bush was a RINO). It is easier to find information about their "accomplishments" than about Trump's (and really, we do not need formal criteria for achievements -- achievements are achievements, and we'll thus approach it on a case-by-case basis. Period.). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 01:30, 21 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::JDano, achievements are achievements regardless of what they cost, and even if a court blocks it. We can note that an achievement was blocked by a court (only if the block was final -- court proceedings take a long time and are oftentimes in numerous courts). BTW, I am not differentiating the "first 100 days" (a silly date marker) from the rest of 2017. Also, just because we did not cover Obama and Bush's presidencies in so much detail, it doesn't mean we can't cover Trump's presidency in more detail. As Andy correctly stated, Obama and Bush were not as opposed by the MSM (the MSM loved Obama, and Bush was a RINO). It is easier to find information about their "accomplishments" than about Trump's (and really, we do not need formal criteria for achievements -- achievements are achievements, and we'll thus approach it on a case-by-case basis. Period.). --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 01:30, 21 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::Also, regarding your argument on there not being enough volunteers on CP for this, let me note that people here edit on topics that interest them. You cannot make people edit topics of which they have no interest. However, I do have the interest and the willingness to edit and update this article series through the end of Trump's presidency, and assuming I am still editing CP in 8 years, I might start on a new series for the next president. Unless I become unable to edit (serious injury, death, etc.), there is no reason to worry about updating this article. I am trying to note new developments in previous listed achievements, including court obsticals. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 02:03, 21 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::Also, regarding your argument on there not being enough volunteers on CP for this, let me note that people here edit on topics that interest them. You cannot make people edit topics of which they have no interest. However, I do have the interest and the willingness to edit and update this article series through the end of Trump's presidency, and assuming I am still editing CP in 8 years, I might start on a new series for the next president. Unless I become unable to edit (serious injury, death, etc.), there is no reason to worry about updating this article. I am trying to note new developments in previous listed achievements, including court obsticals. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 02:03, 21 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::::You are correct that people will edit on topics that interest them and we can't "force" people where they must edit. However, in any wiki, we need editors to copy-edit and fact-check every article. This is an online encyclopedia (mostly modeled after Wikipedia, but without the bias
that is found there) targeted to a high school reader. It is not a daily newspaper; it is not a PhD dissertation; and it is not the bullet-point research notes for the author's next book. (People have tried to turn Wikipedia into all of those.) I understand what the Conservapedia article on "Baseball" is supposed to be. It would be weird for me to add a paragraph on last night's baseball game to it. We need to have a thoughtful, broad-based conversation on what this article is supposed to be. If Trump invites the winner of the 2017 World Series to the White House, does it get included in this article, the baseball article, or neither?
::::::::Trump promised an action-packed 100 days, so I can see how Conservapedia worked hard to document it in detail. Now that we have a cabinet in place and continue to have a very large federal work force, what is our criteria for determining that some achievement is included in this article? If a scientist at NIH discovers a cure for cancer, will we call it a "Donald Trump achievement"? If an infrastructure project which was planned during the Bush Administration, and built mostly during the Obama administration, has a dedication ceremony this year, will we call it a "Donald Trump achievement"? Let's agree on something to avoid future editor conflict and avoid confusing the readers. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 07:06, 23 June 2017 (EDT)
== VA to deal with under/unused buildings ==
== VA to deal with under/unused buildings ==