712:: In relation to the issue of the significance of his resignation as a delegate to the Republican National Convention, it would probably be helpful to keep in mind that the reason that he gave for doing so (and this is also why it was national news) was that he could not in good conscience cast a vote for Donald Trump. Opposition to Trump within the GOP even once he had secured the 2016 Republican nomination was a significant aspect of the 2016 United States presidential campaign, and so were the causes of that opposition to the person who now, as you know, has become the President of the United States. Joshua Claybourn's resignation as a delegate was important enough either as evidence of that opposition or as a symbol of it that major national news outlets in the U.S. reported it. If the article needs more citations in order to adequately demonstrate this, I can provide them, though I did not think that they were difficult to find. It is probably also worth mentioning that my search (using Google) turned up articles not just from major U.S. news outlets but also from a couple of foreign ones. Since my familiarity with foreign news publications printed in foreign languages is limited, I looked them up here on Knowledge to get a sense of whether these two are credible, well-established publications, and my impression was that they are. For anyone who wants to double-check, the publications are the
720:. Both of the publications are German (and printed in the German language), and both mention Claybourn's resignation as a delegate and include a quote from him (though the quote has been translated into German). As far as I know, Knowledge does not have a hard rule on this point, but I think that the fact that two German news outlets thought his resignation significant enough to report at all in Germany (and to quote him) is useful as at least a rough indicator of significance. I would not normally expect a major German newspaper and a major German news magazine to take notice of what some American did while present in the United States unless they, in their judgment as secondary sources, considered what he did to be noteworthy and thought that their readers might actually care about it. I do not mean to suggest that his resignation was the story of the year, but while I do not think this coverage of it would justify a new Joshua Claybourn article on the German-language (or "Deutsch") Knowledge, it does justify keeping this article on the English-language Knowledge.
772:
reading about it at the time, but I think that at least one of the articles that I looked at last night also said that. I'll try to find one (maybe a few) and link to it here. It would make sense that a delegate would be bound in casting the first ballot, though, because now-President Trump did win the
Indiana Republican primary in May 2016 (I am from Indiana, so I remember that vividly, though as infrequently as I can manage), and that primary would not have served any obvious purpose if delegates for the state were not obligated to vote for its winner on at least the first ballot at the convention. I'll Google up a source or two now, though, since those ought to have more weight than my own reasoning and my own memory of things.
325:. I agree with John Pack Lambert that being a delegate to a party convention is not grounds for notability, but I think that resigning as a delegate for a party convention can be, depending on the circumstances. Resigning due to illness or a some low-level personal scandal, for example would obviously not cut it. Resigning in public protest of the nominee of your party, I would say, is a far more likely indicator of notability.
820:
position). It may be helpful in settling the question of what the position that Joshua
Claybourn resigned actually was and why his unwillingness to cast a vote for Mr. Trump made it necessary for him to resign that position. That is important to know in order to understand why his resignation drew the attention of national and even international news organizations.
663:: This article's deficiency lies with its weak introduction. That needs to be fleshed out more. The authorship history is of minor significance but when taken together with the notable and high profile resignation as a delegate (covered extensively in the New York Times and CNN, among others), it makes this an easy determination.--
771:
I am pretty sure that he would have been required to cast his vote for Trump on the first ballot at the convention, and if a nominee had not been successfully chosen on the first ballot, he might have been able to use his own judgment on a second or any subsequent ballot. That was my impression from
488:
I don't appreciate being summoned here by a template that is meant to be used for the article creator. This subject is vaguely of interest to me and the article creator is anonymous. I am inclined to recommend it being kept, because there are sources, and the political aspect of this subject is minor
788:
There may be better articles than this (ones that more directly state that
Claybourn would have been required to vote for Trump on the first ballot and that the possibility of a second ballot had been eliminated due to the number of delegates Trump had managed to win in the primaries up to that
819:
article is a different one than the one to which I linked before. This one does not actually mention
Claybourn, but it does provide additional information about in what sense of the word "delegate" he was to be a delegate to the Republican National Convention (before his resignation of that
742:
as a delegate to this conference sufficient for that opinion to be notable? Now I think a senatorial candidate taking that line would have been; I know no-one gives a damn what I think of Trump, but where does a conference delegate stand between those two points? Are they even a
677:
Comment: apologies if this is not in line with protocol, but YHoshua, do you have a conflict of interest? Your talk page says you run the website for the
Claybourn family, and that link says that the site is run by Joshua Claybourn, who is the subject of this article.
209:
I don't see enough evidence of notability here. Legal work is not notable. Book on
Lincoln is not yet published. Citations mostly appear to be articles by the subject, or in one case a non-reliable source, the three-sentence Hewitt post. Was AfDed in 2005,
577:. His main weblog was one of the most influential, read, and commented at, and he was also a major contributor to other weblogs. He had a major role in the Blogosphere, almost from its beginning. He has since achieved success, in many other ways.
599:
blogger - he'd have to have started whilst still at school. Also the ref given for this is a trivial one para mention of five bloggers, with no description of each. Also the blog linked there is dead, now some sort of Thai spam page.
303:
I did explain on your talk page. At some point you had commented and/or edited an article relating to the "Never Trump" movement and thus I thought you might be able to add input to the discussion. My apologies if I was in
52:. Lesson 1 don't canvass editors as it simply makes the process of weighting votes impossible. No objection to immediate renomination to get a clean discussion going. I will block anyone who canvasses a fresh nomination.
178:
249:
the events of 2016 are not enough to establish notability. Being a delegate to a party convention is not grounds for notability, resigning as a delegate for a party convention, is even less a sign of notability.
755:? The first of these, and being unable to do so from conscience, is a much stronger statement of disagreement than that of a representative who has already been told to make their own choice.
527:
502:
781:
764:
258:
909:
647:
609:
461:
441:
421:
401:
381:
266:
IndyNotes notified around 30 users who had nothing to do with editing or working on this article or the previous AfD (from thirteen years ago) of this nom; I don't know if this is a
829:
810:
717:
565:
77:
498:
483:
361:
704:
627:
313:
729:
862:
713:
586:
449:
294:
241:
687:
672:
548:
340:
618:'s implication that the blogging background is a relatively weak basis for this article. However, it's a supportive data point for other more significant justifications.--
232:: The events in 2016 as a delegate justify notability (and occurred after the 2005 discussion), in addition to recent publication contract with a major university press.--
172:
494:
131:
887:
816:
223:
138:
858:
738:
I had just the same opinion myself - "I could not in good conscience cast a vote for Donald Trump". It's not an unusual opinion. Now, here's the nub - was
798:
389:
821:
802:
773:
721:
854:
578:
211:
72:
849:: Clayborn made national news for his decision regarding being a delegate. Additionally, its only cited in passing, but he has been a writer for
409:
369:
56:
573:: Aside from Mr. Claybourn's published work, status as a Delegate, and his other notable characteristics, Josh was a key figure in the early
349:
429:
193:
751:(a literal delegate, although it's rarely used that way) or were they there instead as a representative, and expected instead
160:
104:
99:
794:
790:
108:
747:
in a strict sense? (this term gets stretched every which way). Is such a conference 'delegate' expected to represent
474:, as for bd2412, because of resigning in protest over Biff. Also note that I'm unimpressed by the obvious CANVASSing.
91:
897:
595:
What sort of date for his blog? He's described here as "the next generation of bloggers" and I can't see him as an
515:
744:
154:
17:
896:: I notified some editors who had voted on other AfD discussions for political or author-related articles per
514:: I notified some editors who had voted on other AfD discussions for political or author-related articles per
113:
539:. Not sure why I was notified, but this clearly looks like a vanity page on a not-really-notable individual.
150:
125:
200:
928:
254:
40:
850:
61:
900:. I tried to get an even split of people who had voted for both deleting and keeping articles. --
561:
518:. I tried to get an even split of people who had voted for both deleting and keeping articles. --
883:
760:
695:- I was not able to locate sufficient secondary biographical sources to establish notability.
643:
605:
479:
457:
437:
417:
397:
377:
357:
121:
166:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
924:
923:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
700:
95:
36:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
825:
806:
777:
725:
250:
117:
8:
905:
623:
582:
523:
309:
285:
237:
214:, and decision was delete. Not sure whether it was in fact deleted and reinstated later.
557:
879:
756:
683:
668:
639:
615:
601:
490:
489:
and not the main claim for significance. But I won't put this in bold because of the
475:
453:
433:
413:
393:
373:
353:
267:
219:
874:
696:
544:
335:
87:
62:
186:
901:
619:
519:
305:
273:
233:
679:
664:
215:
53:
574:
556:-- I do not think his historical work is sufficient to make him notable.
540:
326:
917:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
853:
one of the largest non-partisan political website in
Indiana.
450:
list of United States of
America-related deletion discussions
270:
or a bot gone wrong or what it is; please explain IndyNotes.
873:: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been
78:
Articles for deletion/Joshua
Claybourn (2nd nomination)
185:
789:
point), but here are three of them: First, one from
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
931:). No further edits should be made to this page.
448:Note: This discussion has been included in the
428:Note: This discussion has been included in the
408:Note: This discussion has been included in the
390:list of Politicians-related deletion discussions
388:Note: This discussion has been included in the
368:Note: This discussion has been included in the
348:Note: This discussion has been included in the
212:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Joshua Claybourn
898:Knowledge:Canvassing#Appropriate_notification
516:Knowledge:Canvassing#Appropriate_notification
199:
50:Hopelessly Tainted by SPA and Canvassed votes
410:list of History-related deletion discussions
370:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
350:list of People-related deletion discussions
634:OK then, you've swayed me. In which case,
430:list of Law-related deletion discussions
14:
73:Articles for deletion/Joshua Claybourn
749:a mandate they've already been given
23:
24:
943:
753:to use their own best judgement
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
714:Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
13:
1:
910:18:13, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
888:16:15, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
863:04:39, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
830:04:42, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
811:02:35, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
782:01:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
765:16:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
730:06:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
705:04:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
688:22:46, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
673:15:41, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
648:17:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
628:16:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
610:16:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
587:01:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
566:00:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
549:14:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
528:18:13, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
503:10:57, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
484:09:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
462:07:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
442:07:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
422:07:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
402:07:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
382:07:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
362:07:34, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
341:05:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
314:04:41, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
295:04:39, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
259:03:24, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
242:02:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
224:02:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
57:10:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
7:
10:
948:
920:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
68:AfDs for this article:
799:the Indianapolis Star
877:to this discussion.
495:Ilyina Olya Yakovna
878:
817:Indianapolis Star
493:policy. Regards.
464:
444:
424:
404:
384:
364:
292:
251:John Pack Lambert
939:
922:
868:
795:the Daily Caller
447:
427:
407:
387:
367:
347:
333:
293:
288:
282:
281:
276:
204:
203:
189:
141:
129:
111:
88:Joshua Claybourn
63:Joshua Claybourn
34:
947:
946:
942:
941:
940:
938:
937:
936:
935:
929:deletion review
918:
797:, and one from
327:
286:
279:
274:
271:
264:Neutral comment
146:
137:
102:
86:
83:
66:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
945:
934:
933:
913:
912:
866:
865:
851:Howey Politics
843:
842:
841:
840:
839:
838:
837:
836:
835:
834:
833:
832:
813:
791:the New Yorker
733:
732:
707:
690:
675:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
650:
612:
590:
589:
568:
551:
533:
532:
531:
530:
506:
505:
486:
466:
465:
445:
425:
405:
385:
365:
344:
343:
319:
318:
317:
316:
298:
297:
261:
244:
207:
206:
143:
82:
81:
80:
75:
67:
65:
60:
46:
45:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
944:
932:
930:
926:
921:
915:
914:
911:
907:
903:
899:
895:
892:
891:
890:
889:
885:
881:
876:
872:
864:
860:
856:
852:
848:
845:
844:
831:
827:
823:
818:
814:
812:
808:
804:
800:
796:
792:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
779:
775:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
762:
758:
754:
750:
746:
741:
737:
736:
735:
734:
731:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
708:
706:
702:
698:
694:
691:
689:
685:
681:
676:
674:
670:
666:
662:
659:
658:
649:
645:
641:
637:
633:
632:
631:
630:
629:
625:
621:
617:
614:I agree with
613:
611:
607:
603:
598:
594:
593:
592:
591:
588:
584:
580:
576:
572:
569:
567:
563:
559:
558:Peterkingiron
555:
552:
550:
546:
542:
538:
535:
534:
529:
525:
521:
517:
513:
510:
509:
508:
507:
504:
500:
496:
492:
487:
485:
481:
477:
473:
472:
468:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
446:
443:
439:
435:
431:
426:
423:
419:
415:
411:
406:
403:
399:
395:
391:
386:
383:
379:
375:
371:
366:
363:
359:
355:
351:
346:
345:
342:
339:
338:
334:
332:
331:
324:
321:
320:
315:
311:
307:
302:
301:
300:
299:
296:
291:
289:
278:
277:
269:
265:
262:
260:
256:
252:
248:
245:
243:
239:
235:
231:
228:
227:
226:
225:
221:
217:
213:
202:
198:
195:
192:
188:
184:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
152:
149:
148:Find sources:
144:
140:
136:
133:
127:
123:
119:
115:
110:
106:
101:
97:
93:
89:
85:
84:
79:
76:
74:
71:
70:
69:
64:
59:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
919:
916:
893:
880:Hhhhhkohhhhh
870:
867:
846:
757:Andy Dingley
752:
748:
739:
709:
692:
660:
640:Andy Dingley
635:
616:Andy Dingley
602:Andy Dingley
596:
570:
553:
536:
511:
476:Andy Dingley
470:
469:
454:Hhhhhkohhhhh
434:Hhhhhkohhhhh
414:Hhhhhkohhhhh
394:Hhhhhkohhhhh
374:Hhhhhkohhhhh
354:Hhhhhkohhhhh
336:
329:
328:
323:Leaning keep
322:
283:
272:
263:
246:
229:
208:
196:
190:
182:
175:
169:
163:
157:
147:
134:
49:
47:
31:
28:
793:, one from
697:Magnolia677
575:Blogosphere
571:Strong keep
173:free images
822:Duodecimus
803:Duodecimus
774:Duodecimus
722:Duodecimus
491:WP:CANVASS
268:WP:CANVASS
925:talk page
902:IndyNotes
875:canvassed
855:Iufoltzie
620:IndyNotes
579:Pacificus
520:IndyNotes
471:weak keep
306:IndyNotes
234:IndyNotes
37:talk page
927:or in a
745:delegate
740:his role
304:error.--
132:View log
39:or in a
894:Comment
680:Tacyarg
665:YHoshua
512:Comment
287:chatter
216:Tacyarg
179:WP refs
167:scholar
105:protect
100:history
54:Spartaz
693:Delete
636:delete
554:Delete
541:john k
537:Delete
330:bd2412
247:Delete
151:Google
109:delete
815:This
718:FOCUS
597:early
194:JSTOR
155:books
139:Stats
126:views
118:watch
114:links
16:<
906:talk
884:talk
871:Note
859:talk
847:Keep
826:talk
807:talk
778:talk
761:talk
726:talk
716:and
710:Keep
701:talk
684:talk
669:talk
661:Keep
644:talk
624:talk
606:talk
583:talk
562:talk
545:talk
524:talk
499:talk
480:talk
458:talk
438:talk
418:talk
398:talk
378:talk
358:talk
310:talk
275:Nate
255:talk
238:talk
230:Keep
220:talk
187:FENS
161:news
122:logs
96:talk
92:edit
201:TWL
130:– (
908:)
886:)
869:—
861:)
828:)
809:)
801:.
780:)
763:)
728:)
703:)
686:)
671:)
646:)
638:.
626:)
608:)
585:)
564:)
547:)
526:)
501:)
482:)
460:)
452:.
440:)
432:.
420:)
412:.
400:)
392:.
380:)
372:.
360:)
352:.
312:)
257:)
240:)
222:)
181:)
124:|
120:|
116:|
112:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
904:(
882:(
857:(
824:(
805:(
776:(
759:(
724:(
699:(
682:(
667:(
642:(
622:(
604:(
581:(
560:(
543:(
522:(
497:(
478:(
456:(
436:(
416:(
396:(
376:(
356:(
337:T
308:(
290:)
284:(
280:•
253:(
236:(
218:(
205:)
197:·
191:·
183:·
176:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
153:(
145:(
142:)
135:·
128:)
90:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.