Deletion of Presidency of Joe Biden (2nd nomination)

Comment: procedural. Firstly, a nom not even a week after the first nom is wp:IDHT|disruptive. Secondly, reliable sources ''discuss a Biden presidency'', and those reliable sources do not entertain the nominator's opinion that "{{tq|for all we know it a Biden presidency might never transpire}}" (instead, they argue opposite and paint Trump's challenges to the election as inconsequential to the election result). Thirdly, as a point of interest (preempting  comments) a few days after Trump was elected we had the same article for Trump — {{oldid2|748745531|Presidency of Donald Trump}} — despite the results not having been certified; as such, this article seems pretty consistent
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHER)

Comment: The article's quality, contents, and references cited is irrelevant when it comes to AFD discussions. The fact of the matter is that the article ''will'' grow as time goes by, and sources will, without a doubt, become available as time moves on. This meets , , and any others by a long shot. There's no recourse for argument than what is expected in Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and this page vaults over it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:GNG)

Comment: to the target already suggested until he's actually the president. This is clearly a case of  and it wasn't really addressed in the other nomination to a meaningful degree
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)