Talk:Political activities of Elon Musk

the article feels very synthy... not sure that this all groups together well as a cohesive article...

would it work as maybe WP:NLIST? Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

:I think thats more about how young and patchy the article is rather than whether or not a cohesive article can actually be written... We do seem to have a number of sources which give signficant coverage to the "Political activities of Elon Musk" writ large. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

The section is incorrectly titled as Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal, because has mainly talked about Oldham Council child abuse, whoose public inquiry has been the main topic of contention, while broadly also talking about Rotherham and other "grooming gangs" cases, so "UK child sexual abuse scandals" is a better title, and also increasingly used in cited sources. Thanks.RogerYg (talk) 07:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

The content at RBG PAC is clearly not going to be expanded anywhere near what an article should be and would be better off in another article. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose, not seeing any compelling reason to merge and none has been given by OP... Honestly it just looks like they're trying to pump their own page (this one). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
• :Nobody owns an article, and I would remind you to assume good faith. – Anne drew (talk · contribs) 16:09, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

:Support: Speaking as the creator of the RBG PAC article, in the long term I believe the notability is quite minimal. The RBG PAC website is no longer even functional, and it was only relevant for around 3 months (October to December 2024). I'm also opposed to including all the content relating to the PAC in this article, as that will only bloat it. A line or two is enough. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 19:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

• Support per above from Howardcorn33. If there were more to add here then great, but at 250 odd words it'd fit better as a merged section to Political activities of Elon Musk and trimmed from there. CNC (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
• Support on above grounds of notability. I agree a merged section would work well. Ludicrous (talk)
• Support ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment also worth thinking about merging Views of Elon Musk which is a distinct but heavily overlapping article. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
• :I'm inclined to think the Politics section, which is around 43% at present (or ~3,300 words) would be better merged with this article to form Political positions of Elon Musk, similar to other "Political positions of" type articles and merge to there, or otherwise Political views of Elon Musk would do. I only just got the Views article down from 9,500 odd words to 7,700, and even with trimming duplicate information, that'd be a very tight fit to get both these articles combined down to a reasonable size. CNC (talk) 13:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

I think we should add a section about Musk being called "President Musk" by critics as a dig at Trump (and I'm sure even some supporters), and how he has seemingly taken over a lot of aspects of the US government and media cycle. Maybe even a section that focuses on his relationship with Trump, to begin with. CNC33 (. . .talk) 00:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)