Talk:Racial views of Donald Trump

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Racial views of Donald Trump article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9: 2 months

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Television / Government Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance).

United States Presidents: Donald Trump Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Presidents, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of United States Presidents on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States PresidentsWikipedia:WikiProject United States PresidentsTemplate:WikiProject United States PresidentsUnited States Presidents
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Donald Trump task force.

Discrimination Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

African diaspora Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Section sizes

Section size for Racial views of Donald Trump (89 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	15,542	15,542
Pre-presidency	20	26,205
Housing discrimination cases	7,365	7,365
Central Park jogger case	9,887	9,887
Black professionals	2,269	2,269
Native American casino industry	4,205	4,205
The Apprentice	2,459	2,459
2016 campaign	19	28,092
Mexican immigrants	719	719
Proposed Muslim immigration ban	142	142
Hispanic judge	4,850	4,850
Hate crime	1,695	1,695
New Jersey Arabs	2,461	2,461
Somali refugees	2,499	2,499
Racial accusations on Twitter and in debates	9,516	9,516
Minority outreach during 2016 campaign	6,191	6,191
First presidency	59	197,846
Immigration policy	4,228	4,228
Judicial appointments	1,105	1,105
Black Caucus	3,947	3,947
Derogatory statements towards Haiti and Nigeria	1,230	1,230
Hurricane Maria	1,851	1,851
Pardon of Joe Arpaio	6,683	6,683
NFL national anthem protests	9,768	9,768
Charlottesville rally	14,008	14,008
Elizabeth Warren	4,104	4,104
"Pretty Korean lady"	2,568	2,568
"Shithole countries"	16,296	30,359
Response from Republicans	4,374	4,374
Response from Democrats	4,366	4,366
International response	5,323	5,323
"The Snake" song and story	2,710	2,710
Alice Marie Johnson	2,298	2,298
Affirmative action in schools	953	953
Immigrants in Europe	1,666	1,666
White farmers in South Africa	3,709	3,709
"I am a nationalist"	1,457	1,457
Trump-backed ad removed	1,073	1,073
'Only in the Panhandle'	2,487	2,487
Harriet Tubman on the twenty-dollar bill	2,410	2,410
Democratic congresswomen should "go back" to their countries	32,520	32,520
"Rat and rodent infested mess"	15,581	15,581
Mass shooting in Texas	2,665	2,665
Jewish voters who support Democrats "disloyal"	6,030	6,030
Support of Stephen Miller	1,448	1,448
Support of Rush Limbaugh	1,901	1,901
"Chinese Virus" and "Kung Flu"	6,601	6,601
"When the looting starts, the shooting starts"	2,722	2,722
Moving date of Tulsa rally	1,316	1,316
Lincoln's end result "questionable"	697	697
Videos of black men attacking white people	1,311	1,311
"Bad hombres" and rapists	2,888	2,888
"White Power" retweet	4,211	4,211
Criticism of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing program	1,059	1,059
Independence Day speech	3,968	3,968
Support for Confederate symbols	5,016	5,016
Reversal of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rule	1,818	1,818
Opposition to diversity training	2,112	2,112
Claims of racism by his former attorney	802	802
Interview with Bob Woodward	798	798
Rolling back civil rights protections	923	923
1776 Commission	1,768	1,768
Funding for the Community Relations Service	1,018	1,018
2020 campaign	19	12,111
Nazi symbol in Facebook ads	1,260	1,260
Kamala Harris citizenship conspiracy theories	4,958	4,958
"Good genes"	1,636	1,636
First 2020 presidential debate	4,238	4,238
Inter-presidency	24	16,288
Truth Social posts	3,332	3,332
Meeting with Nick Fuentes and Kanye West	2,438	2,438
Poisoning of blood comment	1,780	1,780
Indictments and mug shot comments	1,522	1,522
Dehumanizing rhetoric about undocumented immigrants	3,452	3,452
Claim that Jewish Democrats hate Israel and their religion	3,740	3,740
2024 campaign	4,147	4,147
Impact	6,624	14,099
Effects on students	3,331	3,331
Effects on children	1,269	1,269
Reactions by the Congressional Black Caucus	2,875	2,875
Defenses of Donald Trump	6,675	6,675
Support from white nationalists and white supremacists	10,409	10,409
Analysis	13	13,108
Journalists and pundits	8,160	8,160
Academics	4,935	4,935
Opinion polling	4,823	4,823
See also	99	99
References	30	30
External links	519	519
Total	349,993	349,993

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 January 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

Trump Racism Page has a glitch

someone planted a glitch in the wiki page summarizing Trump’s extensive history of racism. The page resets every time the subsections are clicked. This is likely a deliberate cover-up. Please fix it.

https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump 72.88.209.10 (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the title

Extended content

I'm hoping to get a consensus that the title needs to change. The title doesn't accurately reflect the article's contents. The first sentence: "Donald Trump... has a history of speech and actions that have been viewed by scholars and the public as racist or sympathetic to White supremacy" shows the article is not discussing his views, but his speech and actions, failing WP:PRECISE.

A title change has been discussed a few times before on this page (e.g. [1], [2] and [3]). If a consensus that the title needs to change is established, alternatives can be discussed. This can involve discussing options, and then putting them to an RfC. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 10:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

then suggest alternates and conduct a poll. we're not going to do a yes-or-no name change, then decide a title if that is somehow successful. ass-backwards. ValarianB (talk) 20:54, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: I agree with you.
I advise you to read ValarianB's comment and do as they suggested. JacktheBrown (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and then putting them to an RfC. WP:RM, rather. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:44, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes RM sorry. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ValarianB, JacktheBrown and Mandruss for the input. I'll reframe: Racial views of Donald Trump should be renamed, as the article is not about his views, but rather his comments and actions as seen in the lede sentence. Unless there is consensus that there are not issues with the current title, I will be putting this to a requested move.

This post is an effort to establish what options will be put forward at the requested move. Some prior suggestions include Donald Trump and race, Donald Trump and racism, Donald Trump and racial issues and Accusations of racism against Donald Trump. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 22:04, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you may be missing the point of the page. We can't read his mind, obviously, so we'll never have perfect proof of any of his views. But we do have evidence of his views in the form of his words and actions. Which is what this article is about. Loki (talk) 04:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Loki for making this comment; it's certainly worth making and discussing. I did consider this and rejected it as conduct can be (characterized as) racist without us being able to extrapolate views. Does he have prejudice towards this race, or is he being Machiavellian? The latter is frequently asserted as why he lies; that's what makes them lies rather than delusions. Reliable sources on the left of the American political spectrum [1][2][3] explicitly discuss his racism as a strategy.

Taking sources describing conduct as racist without them relating it to views and adding their conduct here is original research. Moreover, as evidence that the page is not about views but actions and words characterized as racist: the lede doesn't mention the word/concept. A useful comparison here is Racial views of Winston Churchill § Views of Churchill towards race. You may take this as an argument to cut the 90% of the article which fails verifiability rather than renaming.

I may have this upside down and am extremely open to being wrong, please assume good faith of me, I will certainly be doing so of you. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 06:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: I missed an important reason why sources may not link actions to views apart from strategy: they may not want to try to "read his mind". Given such a source, we should not be more willing to try. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 07:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What to? Slatersteven (talk) 11:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slatersteven This post is an effort to establish what options will be put forward at the requested move. Some prior suggestions include Donald Trump and race, Donald Trump and racism, Donald Trump and racial issues and Accusations of racism against Donald Trump. This is an effort to brainstorm options and decide which to include in a requested move (unless consensus is against a requested move). Do you have any suggestions apart from the ones listed above? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NO, as I am unsure a title change is needed, and I do not sign blank cheques. Slatersteven (talk) 12:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slatersteven (last ping) No blank checks needed; if editors including yourself at an RM reject alternatives no changes occur to the title. An RM also won't go ahead if there's a consensus that there aren't issues with the title, so if you think there aren't issues with WP:PRECISE, this is the place to speak your mind. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:32, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think 'Accusations of racism against Donald Trump' is most appropriate. By its framing, the article cannot be an impartial exploration of Trump's views. Riposte97 (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: please propose the new title; to do this, initiate a move request. If it convinces me, I will vote in favour. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 November 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved - No consensus that the proposed title would be more accurate, precise. FOARP (talk) 21:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC) FOARP (talk) 21:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Racial views of Donald Trump → Accusations of racism against Donald Trump – given that no one else has proposed a title and the discussion has been going on for days without a result, I take the advice of Riposte97 as good; since I'm the OP, I'm in favor of changing the title. JacktheBrown (talk) 23:15, 16 November 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, as stated above. The current name is a perfectly fine description of the page. Expecting a page about views to be about mind-reading is an unreasonable expectation. Such a page must necessarily be about the words and actions of its subject because that's how we know what his views are. Furthermore, I think that renaming the page to this specific suggestion is a violation of WP:CLAIM as it suggests that there have merely been "accusations" of racism against Donald Trump. Loki (talk) 23:29, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @LokiTheLiar: in my opinion, there were both certainly not nice phrases said by Donald Trump (to be kind), and real accusations of racism against him; I think the truth lies perfectly in the middle. JacktheBrown (talk) 23:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- LokiTheLiar Can you respond to the response above, namely that as most sources don't extrapolate his views from his actions, we shouldn't be willing to go further than they are, and that by extrapolating his views from his actions, despite some reliable sources arguing against this practice, we are performing original research? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  When a source quotes Donald Trump directly, we do not need the source to explicitly state "and Donald Trump believes what he said" for that conclusion to not be original research.
  
  Similarly, when a source mentions something racist Trump did, it's usually very obviously relevant to this article. So for instance, the fact that Trump was found by a court to be discriminating against black people is clearly relevant to this article whether or not the source explicitly connects it to his views. Loki (talk) 03:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Thanks Loki for the response. The points are in, over to the jury to deliberate. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Editors should read the discussion above for the justification for a name change: the page does not claim to be about his views but rather "actions and speech" characterised as racist. These are two different concepts. Editors are also invited to comment on alternative names proposed, including Donald Trump and racism, Donald Trump and race and Donald Trump and racial issues. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 23:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support change to Donald Trump and racism or Donald Trump and racial issues as better fits the scope of the article as it stands and the reliable sources it covers, weakly support change to Accusations of racism against Donald Trump: I sympathize with Loki that this runs up against WP:CLAIM, but the idea that it suggests that accusations are the extent of the scope matches the article's actual content, which uses attribution rather than wikivoice: viewed by scholars and the public as racist or sympathetic to White supremacy rather than are racist. Oppose Donald Trump and race, broader scope than article covers. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:38, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No one makes him say or do stuff, and yes, it is analyzed. We reflect what RS say. Slatersteven (talk) 12:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Slatersteven, could you clarify if "we reflect what RS say" is contra Loki's point that we can extrapolate his views from his actions and it not be original research? Is it a refutation of my claim that the majority of sources are not relating his actions to his interiority? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:43, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - I do not care what their reasons are, I have stated mine, RS has commented on his actions and words, and deeds. Nor am I sure what you are talking about. I can find any number of sources (including court cases) where his Words, deeds, and actions have been found to be racist. Slatersteven (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - His words, "deeds" and actions (not sure how you're distinguishing the latter two) can be found to be racist, but this can be in intent, (reflecting internal views), effect, or both. Does this clear up my meaning? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      - No, as none of this is internal, as he has openly expressed racists views (as stated by RS) and carried out racist actions (as stated by RS) and had been found to have done so by courts, so it is not internalized. Slatersteven (talk) 13:26, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        The majority of RS say he has said and done racist things rather than say he has "expressed racist views". A subset analyze this conduct as expressing his views, another subset analyze them as a strategy. Most don't try to analyze intent. If the majority of sources aren't commenting on intent, framing his conduct around it is giving undue weight. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 13:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose changing to Accusations of racism against Donald Trump, support keeping the same title or changing it to the aforementioned Donald Trump and racism. A great majority of the academic sources I've read state plainly and simply that his views regarding illegal immigrants, Mexicans and Muslims are "racist". But the current title is somewhat balanced, so I wouldn't care if it stayed the same. I also agree with Loki's comment in the thread above, this article is about Trump's views on race. Badbluebus (talk) 22:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Some appear to be using Support/Oppose as to this specific proposal. Others are using them as to any move at all. This makes the bolded word fairly useless for a quick assessment of consensus. And it's effectively a democratic vote, since there is no clear policy basis for any argument. I'll !vote below without a bolded word. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:29, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The key policy disagreement is whether the title is precise, which requires article titles unambiguously define the topical scope of the article. There is a disagreement over whether the current title does this and whether alternatives do it better, as well as whether alternatives have other policy issues (particularly POV considerations). Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 01:02, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, well in my opinion Donald Trump and racism unambiguously define[s] the topical scope of the article and does not present an NPOV problem. Others will disagree, and so much for the benefit of policy in discussions like this. ―Mandruss ☎ 01:08, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Do you think it does this more or less than the current title? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 01:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      - My !vote below answers that as well as I can. Generally, I think we agonize too much over article titles, and policy can be unhelpfully complicated, nuanced, and overthought, and often is. So, when I participate in RMs at all, which isn't often, I like to give my opinion and leave. If a closer chooses to discount my argument, I won't lose any sleep. ―Mandruss ☎ 01:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like Donald Trump and racism as about as vague and bland as we could get, which imo is a good thing for such a controversial topic. (I vaguely recall being here before, and I think I said something similar then.) But "accusations" should be "allegations"; see Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations. ―Mandruss ☎ 00:29, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose These are not mere accusations, of which there exist myriad for so many politicians. These include large numbers of statements, policies, rulings, and actions before and during his political life. Maybe another title would be an improvement. But this proposal would be less accurate. O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oppose trump has a long and well-documented history of comments and actions characterized as racist, just calling them accusations is a whitewash. no pun intended. ValarianB (talk) 13:44, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my reasoning above. I'd also note that there is OR going on in this thread, which I trust the closer will disregard. No preponderance of the RS actually purport to go as far as this article does. Riposte97 (talk) 02:27, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The current title is pretty much impossible to achieve as it would need to be his internal thoughts and views, not how people interpret his words and actions. The issue with the arguments above like trump has a long and well-documented history of comments and actions characterized as racist is accurate but also does not fit the title, emphasis on characterized as racist isn't the same as stating what his internal views are. PackMecEng (talk) 14:57, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose proposed title - Per Loki. There have been actual actions that are beyond mere accusations, so the proposed title is definitely not neutral and is trying to make light of the situations. If the actual argument that brought this is that the scope of the article should be explicitly expanded, then I'd give a weak support for Donald Trump and racism, though I think the current title is explicit enough, so my preference would still be to just maintain status quo. Raladic (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The current title is supported by Trump's actual words, cited to reliable sources. Carlstak (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The current title is problematic, but I don't believe the proposed title is any better, and instead introduces a different set of problems. What makes this a more complicated issue is that there are clearly, both in the article and talk page, a lot of opposing POVs regarding racism and Trump, it is also reflected in some of the sentiments of the last paragraph of the article lead. "Racial views of Donald Trump" is problematic because the meaning of that title is very subjective based on the reader. As a result it has turned in to a laundry list of various degrees of statements from direct quotes from Trump, to opinion pieces in newspapers to research from others. The problem is that the current titles does not narrowly enough define what it is trying to capture, so it has turned into a list of "proofs" that Trump is a racist. Instead, this should probably be split into several different articles, such as Donald Trump's statements regarding race and Donald Trump's impact on racial relations and Claims of racist actions by Donald Trump. The quality of what is included is very mixed, for example taking a look at Racial views of Donald Trump § Lincoln's end result "questionable" which from reading what is written plus the source material, to me, sounds like nothing racial. But with a total like "racial" it invites a wide swath that has resulted in an article that is TLDR and lacking in focus. TiggerJay (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Tiggerjay you explained this better than I could; it functioning as "evidence" is problematic and a reflection of the failure of the title to define a verifiable scope, causing issues with WP:INDISCRIMINATE. The suggestions for a split are generally very good, although I'm not sure how they would be actioned. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There are other "X views of Y" articles such as Political views of J. K. Rowling; Religious views of Charles Darwin; Religious and philosophical views of Albert Einstein; and, most relevant of all, Racial views of Winston Churchill. That said, the article is long and may need some of its content split off. Relinus (talk) 02:55, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Relinus: "...and, most relevant of all, Racial views of Winston Churchill." The most relevant based on what? JacktheBrown (talk) 09:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Umm... "Racial"? Like it's literally the same title, just about Churchill instead of Trump. So it shows precedence for such a title. Relinus (talk) 13:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Relinus: ops ^_^ JacktheBrown (talk) 13:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the closes would be the J.K. Rowling one because that is the only BLP listed. Even there it is going off her express stated view. I support X or I oppose Y vs what this article does which is such and such thinks someone else thinks this. PackMecEng (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not accurate to say the JK Rowling article only has her "expressed stated view"—there's even a whole section on reactions to her trans comments. It's entirely acceptable to have reactions and comments from outside sources on things that a person says or does. Of course Trump isn't going to say "I, Donald J. Trump, have the following racial views..." but he makes his views clear by his words and actions, which are documented here along with reactions to them. Relinus (talk) 03:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relinus What do you make of "he makes his views clear by his words and actions" not being supported by the majority of reliable sources, and in fact contested by a not insignificant portion of those reliable sources? Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what reliable sources you're referring to, but this article has plenty of RS supporting it. Relinus (talk) 03:48, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relinus The reliable sources on this article do not verify or discuss whether his actions and words reflect his ~~words~~thoughts. Compare this with Racial views of Winston Churchill, where sources are actually commenting on his views. The sources I mention contesting it are those which discuss his racism as strategy, which is Machiavellian rather than "he makes his views clear by his words and actions". Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 04:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC) Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 07:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support, current title is biased and one-sided.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:10, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This article is largely talking about incidents where he has been accused of being racist, not overall racial views. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:03, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - the current title makes no assumptions or implications of factuality, and is simply about "Trump's racial views", perfectly encompassing both actual quotes and accusations, whether they are based upon words or actions. Adding the term "accusations" to the title does make an assumption - that the article is not about either facts or allegations, but allegations alone, which is a sizeable change in scope, and in my opinion unnecessary. The current title is ambiguous, and it serves the current state of the article well. If this could be carefully curated and split, we might have a better chance of improving the titles at that point, but save for the consensus required to do so, it should remain as is (unless somebody has something better). To anybody who is claiming that it is impossible for us to know a person's internal thoughts, there is no assumption that any reader would do so, as with the several examples noted above, this title is intentionally vague for a reason, as it would be original research for us to assume what is fact and what is allegation. An RFC on the general practice might be more productive rather than focusing on this single highly controversial topic, which will likely always be skewed by bias. ASUKITE 16:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If reliable sources were relating the content of this article to his internal thoughts, it would be fine. The issue is when a) they don't make claims about his thoughts. It shouldn't be controversial that an article on a person's views should reflect reliable sourcing discussing their views b) there is no assumption that any reader would do so there is an assumption as this article is structured as evidence of his thoughts by its titling as discussed by TiggerJay above. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 23:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rollinginhisgrave: +1, you're 100% right. JacktheBrown (talk) 23:34, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Literally nobody stops him from saying this kind of stuff, or eggs him on. He says very racist things or hints at them almost every single day. CNC33 (. . .talk) 03:31, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wiki Education assignment: Political Parties

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2024 and 5 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mackenziejharmon (article contribs).