Talk:Rick Santorum 2016 presidential campaign

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rick Santorum 2016 presidential campaign 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

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States: Presidential elections Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

WP:CRYSTAL

@PrairieKid: Another clear WP:CRYSTAL violation here – can you please just wait until these have been announced? Number 5 7 20:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We talk about this every single time. The only time we agreed to a re-redirecting was on the Jeb Bush article. It's not even close to WP:CRYSTAL--in fact, WP:CRYSTAL says, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place... . As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient." This isn't remotely speculative, it's been widely covered and is certainly important. Even if it was highly speculative (which it is not), we absolutely 115% have the necessary media coverage from reliable sources to have the article.

Bottom line--we know he is running. We know he is announcing tomorrow. We are 99.9% sure his campaign will be notable and will affect the 2016 election. We are not speculating about anything. Jeb Bush's candidacy? I see why that's WP:CRYSTAL. Rick Santorum's? Absolute not. I respectfully disagree with you. I do appreciate the discussion but I ask that we not have to have it every time. PrairieKid (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again: Why can't you just wait? Number 5 7 19:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's an important and newsworthy event even before it starts. Look at all the O'Malley news today. He's near the top of Google News, for example, and most people don't even think he has a chance! Your concern is with WP:CRYSTAL. I think I have effectively answered to that. If you have any other concrete reasons to not put out the articles, I am happy to discuss them. But we can't turn this into a "NO, YOU!" "NO, YOU!" "NOOO, YOU!" argument. It's a discussion. And I'm happy to have it. PrairieKid (talk) 14:59, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOTNEWS. Number 5 7 12:22, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Primary results

According to The Green Papers, Santorum placed 12th among Republicans in the primary with 16,627 votes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.38.14 (talk) 03:34, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]