Deletion of Donald Trump racial views

Comment: The article is pretty clearly a  for all the reasons people think he's a racist.  A more appropriate name for that article would be "here's why Donald Trump is a racist".  And I shouldn't have to point out how an article like that fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP: NPOV||WP: coatrack)

Comment: While it is possible that this may be a valid topic |in the future, at present we lack secondary sources that tie all these incidents together.  Hence it fails |notability, and instead is |synthesis that connects incidents that Wikipedia editors have deemed relevant in order to prove a thesis, that Trump is a racist.  Even if secondary sources could be found, it would be better to |blow it up and start again, because it is easier to write a proper article than to correct a hopelessly flawed one
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTALBALL||WP:NOTABLE||WP:SYN||WP:BLOWITUP)

Comment: I have been a regular at the Donald Trump biography page and related pages for several years. Repeatedly during that time there have been suggestions to say something about his (let’s call them) controversial views and actions toward minorities. Up to now those suggestions have always been rejected as undue or inappropriate. Yes, here on “liberal” Wikipedia, consensus has kept this kind of material out of Donald Trump for several years. But with the explosion of coverage over the past week, |consensus had to change in the face of the overwhelming amount and intensity of Significant Coverage by Multiple Reliable Sources. That coverage included not just “I condemn this” quotes or opinion pieces, but multiple mainstream pieces pulling together his long history of such comments into a coherent narrative. This has transformed from an occasional incident into a well documented pattern. There was once a time to object to this article; that time is past
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Consensus (WP:CCC)

Comment: per Talk:Donald Trump#Racial views -- an appropriate . Meets notability guidelines for stand-alone articles, with  covering the subject. Sources have been widely reporting on Mr Trump's racial views, so there's no BLP violation here. Nor is this content undue, given the extensive coverage over time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SPINOUT||WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: Not encyclopedic and . It's pretty much just a collection of quotes from random pundits who call Trump racist over (insert Trump controversy here). Trump's most recent remarks about Haiti and African countries (apparently the main reason this article was created) should be merged into Immigration policy of Donald Trump
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK)

Comment: This is a highly notable topic. A Google search for "african union trump racist" yielded 1.98M hits, from all around the world, and just about every one on the first two pages is a  news source. The exception is ''The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun''; and anyone who thinks that is a left-wing publication knows nothing about the UK press. (It's owned by Rupert Murdoch
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: This all falls with in the guidelines of a . Be it from the Trump article, Political positions of Donald Trump, or Immigration policy of Donald Trump. There's some editorializing that should probably be dealt with. At the very least a conversation should be opened about renaming as I don't feel this is a case for a common name under . This may also be the most NPOV name possible but thats a discussion for a talk page. I can't justify a deletion here. It doesn't seem to be a POVFORK
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Splitting (WP:SIZESPLIT||WP:POVNAME)

Comment: As a deletionist, not even I can argue for the deletion of this article. President Trump's racist rhetoric has been widely covered not just by the American media, but by world media. As the President of the United States, he ran his campaign under the wagon of prejudice and racism. His racist views preceded his election as President and goes back several decades as evident in the reliable sources cited. I want to make it clear that this article is primarily about his racist views, not his policies in government. His racist views passes the Wikipedia:Notability|notability test and have received worldwide coverage from Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|independent reliable sources. What I am seeing here is . This article is well referenced and his views have received worldwide coverage from multiple sources - each addressing his views in detail. If his racist views were not notable enough, they would not have been covered in the magnitude they were covered. I would also like to draw to the attention of the closing admin (and the community) the fact that, his racist views are not a one off or a slip of the tongue (if it was, I would have been more inclined to merge it to his article), but a pattern of behaviour that goes back decades, at least as far back as 1973 when the U.S. Department of Justice brought litigation against him, his father and their company. This pattern of behaviour continued up to his election and thereafter. This article is encyclopedic and I see nothing wrong with it as a stand alone other than ''"delete because I don't like it"''. Wikipedia:I just don't like it|"The point of an encyclopedia is to provide information, not to describe what you "like" or "don't like".Special:Contributions/31.54.224.18|31.54.224.18
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDLI)

Comment: as  page and unencyclopedic  effort. Trump's comments about incidents A, B and C can be mentioned in our articles about A, B, and C. And they usually are already prominently featured there, along with reactions to his remarks
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attack page (WP:ATTACK||WP:SYNTHESIS)

Comment: The article is well-written and formatted, and everything is |reliably sourced. I don't see a bias in it and any claim there is one is like saying that the article on the German invasion of Poland in 1939 is biased because it says that Germany invaded Poland in 1939. Though I'd propose a page move to "Donald Trump's racial views" since that'd be more grammatically correct
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: There was an earlier and ongoing discussion on this article before this AFD at /N
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: It's not incredibly biased, but even it were, that's not a valid reason for deletion. The content is extremely well sourced and has been been covered for 45 years. There was a discussion at talk:Donald Trump#Racial views about the need to create this article and the support was overwhelming. It is not full of trivia, nor does it violate . If |that argument is to be considered, one would expect it to be accompanied by some sort of evidence of how it violates 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP||WP:CRYBLP||WP:BLP)

Comment: The only arguments I'm seeing against the article are on POV grounds. Since NPOV isn't a reason to delete, the claim that it's a biased article is either IDONTLIKEIT or POVFORK. I don't buy that it's a POV fork. Donald Trump receives a lot of media attention as a quick look at Template:Donald Trump will show. The general practice is that when one aspect of his life gets too much attention for the main article, per , we create a new article to deal with that. That's what happened here. That it happens to be an aspect of his life that reflects poorly upon him is not reason to delete. Creating a new article is appropriate, and it's standard practice
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:SPINOFF)