Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, move, oversight, protect, rollback, Administrators
51,035
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 258:
Line 258: + +
Talk:Donald Trump achievements (view source)
Revision as of 07:14, June 25, 2017
, 07:14, June 25, 2017→Opposition to D.T.
::::::Let's say there is a big infrastructure bill with an important new financing mechanism. Each year, there are dozens of important infrastructure projects financed under the new law. How would you handle that? [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:57, 24 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::Let's say there is a big infrastructure bill with an important new financing mechanism. Each year, there are dozens of important infrastructure projects financed under the new law. How would you handle that? [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:57, 24 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::That could get tricky, but might be manageable. That would depend on the actual issue--I can see how that could become a problem. However, a page split was discussed and generally agreed on, as I remember. I guess we'll see how it goes, unless someone comes up with a better solution. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 01:32, 25 June 2017 (EDT)
:::::::That could get tricky, but might be manageable. That would depend on the actual issue--I can see how that could become a problem. However, a page split was discussed and generally agreed on, as I remember. I guess we'll see how it goes, unless someone comes up with a better solution. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 01:32, 25 June 2017 (EDT)
::::::::@JDano: you are correct. I will try to keep failures only to those that are immediate, such as the Senate failure to repeal the Obama methane regulation, or the Trump Administration's continuation of Obama executive policies. If a court modifies or undoes an achievement, I will still note it in the 2017 article if it happened in a later year. If a failure is undone (like the administration ending DACA in 2018, for example), I will remove the failure but note in the 2018 article how widely-discussed it was as a failure the year prior. The main article would be an overview, so people wanting more information can go to the sub-articles. The articles have a clear organization, and I will be doing the same organization style for each year, so navigating it is not an issue.
::::::::JDano, I don't like discussing hypotheticals. I like tackling an issue only if it is already happening, partly because there are so many variables to consider. But just so I can satisfy your question, I would probably only note the former and not the latter. Noting the bill signed into law is enough I think. I might consider noting the number of infrastructure projects done that year, but it I would not go into specifics. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 03:14, 25 June 2017 (EDT)