Talk:Efforts to impeach Donald Trump

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. More precisely there is consensus not to split for now. Aside from the title being concise, there is insufficient support for reducing the scope of the article as proposed, given the current article size. (closed by non-admin page mover) CNC (talk) 18:46, 28 June 2025 (UTC)

Efforts to impeach Donald Trump → Efforts to impeach Donald Trump during his first presidencyEfforts to impeach Donald Trump during his first presidency – It has been suggested that this article be split, with the content primarily going to the proposed new title, and the content relating to more recent efforts being moved to Efforts to impeach Donald Trump during his second presidency. I reverted a bold attempt to implement such a split, as this requires discussion, which I am initiating here. BD2412 T 02:37, 7 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 03:44, 14 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 05:53, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. The current title is concise and adequate for coverage of impeachment efforts during both presidencies. The proposed second article Special:PermanentLink/1294308500 is barely more than a stub and there is no need for a separate article at this time.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:07, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

• Too early Articles should be split when they become too large. At present there are only a few paragraphs about recent attempts and they have received little media attention. Most likely, the Democrats will win the mid-terms and impeach Trump few more times. But until that happens, there isn't enough text to justify a second article. TFD (talk) 20:18, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
  • @The Four Deuces: Even if that were to happen, the substance of those impeachments would be at Third impeachment of Donald Trump and so on (as with First impeachment of Donald Trump and Second impeachment of Donald Trump). This article would remain a container for generalized efforts. BD2412 T 20:35, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

  @The Four Deuces A few paragraphs of a subject (second term) likely to grow exponentially. Already, since you commented there’d be a whole new section in a spun-off article about Iran conflict related discussions of impeachment .

  the article is already incredibly long just covering his first term. Having it cover both terms is ludicrously lengthy and makes for an incredibly-difficult-to-read article. SecretName101 (talk) 12:17, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

  Policy says articles should be split when the material becomes too large. I do not understand why anyone would propose a controversial move request when all they have to do is wait until there is sufficient text to justify a second article. TFD (talk) 20:37, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

  Have you not seen this current article? Material indeed is too large.

  This article is already bursting at its seams, the logical move is obviously making additional new topics (like his second term) separate from the existing article rather then cramming yet more content into this overlong page. SecretName101 (talk) 12:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

  @SecretName101: There already are additional topics. There are separate articles on the actual impeachments, and on separate investigations. BD2412 T 17:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose, and I particularly agree with the argument that this is too early. I don't see any need to have separate pages for each individual impeachment process (as in First, Second, and potentially Third). For the time being, it makes sense for this page to be a container for everything that has happened so far. If, hypothetically, there are prominent new processes in the future, we can have separate pages for the first and second terms, but that remains speculative for now. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:38, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
• Support - seems a reasonable place to split Red Slash 05:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose — too early. See above.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:47, 25 June 2025 (UTC)