Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Michael Bloomberg 2020 presidential campaign endorsements
Probably more than most, Bloomberg's endorsement list is independently notable. This was something more reflected in Special:Permalink/941802927|this version of the article, but that was Special:Diff/941803219|moved a while ago to the campaign page where it was just removed as Special:Diff/943380878|"vandalism".I was considering a  close for this discussion, but I chatted a bit  with {{u|Deacon Vorbis}} on iscord about that possibility before doing so (wanting to avoid a ELREV). As it stands with , editors generally want to see coverage roughly proportional to a candidate's support. Is that fair? No, probably not. It doesn't really work well with , but for editors in this area it is one of the few things that manage to keep the peace amongst participants. If you want to see the inevitable fall out where one article is created about a candidate (for notability reasons) and |Other stuff doesn't exist, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Media bias against Bernie Sanders|AFD:Media bias against Bernie Sanders.As I said on Discord, the best bet is to withdraw and do a bundled nomination. Alternatively, I would recommend another test case that isn't as covered as much in media as this one; like List of Cory Booker 2020 presidential campaign endorsements because editors are *surprisingly* less vocal about keeping around stuff about inactive candidates who didn't make a large splash (see all the since redirected campaign pages). &#8211
— User:MJL, 16:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SNOW||WP:D||WP:DELREV||WP:ARBAP2||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST (Wikipedia:Snowball clause)