Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First 100 days of Donald Trump's presidency
While I personally find the obsession with the concept of a president's first 100 days to be silly, I can't say that there aren't sources that comment on the first 100 days of other presidents, at least post-FDR. However, I believe that the coverage of this topic is heavily influenced by |recentism. Take George W. Bush, for example. Wikipedia was established just a few days before he took office and was little-known during Bush's first 100 days, so it's not surprising that First 100 days of George W. Bush's presidency was not created at the time. But during Bush's presidency, Wikipedia grew to have millions of users and over 2 million articles -- but still nobody decided to create First 100 days of George W. Bush's presidency during his term, or afterward. On the other hand, Wikipedia was popular when Barack Obama took office, so First 100 days of Barack Obama's presidency ''was'' created at the time. Yet nobody decided to take a historical perspective and create such articles for First 100 days of Dwight D. Eisenhower's presidency, First 100 days of John F. Kennedy's presidency, First 100 days of Richard Nixon's presidency, First 100 days of Jimmy Carter's presidency, First 100 days of Ronald Reagan's presidency, First 100 days of George H. W. Bush's presidency, or First 100 days of Bill Clinton's presidency. Why not? Recentism. The first 100 days may seem to be an interesting topic when they are happening, but once they are over many people lose interest. That could explain why a full 4 paragraphs of First 100 days of Barack Obama's presidency are devoted to Obama's having to re-take the oath of office due to Chief Justice John Roberts misreading it at the inauguration
— User:Metropolitan90, 04:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RECENTISM (Wikipedia:Recentism)