This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States This draft is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Conservatism This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism Politics This draft is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics

There seems to be 2 issues:

- The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations

What exactly isn't met here? there are 29 sources, the footnotes are used properly, as for the type of statements (I checked 5, not all) they abide by the rules.

- This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article (Basically stated by Dan arndt as : The only coverage is because he is the president's son - nothing to establish notability in his own right.)

This is true, he is first and foremost the president's son, but because Donald Trump is the 2nd most popular wikipedia page, this in of itself should make Barron qualifiable (to have his page) as being direct family to Donald Trump. Donald has mentioned Barron several times publicly, including when Barron was present (for exemple, during the inauguration)

Also, he has been politically involved with his father's 2024 campaign, if a lack of sources is the problem, please state it.

With that, I will add another source and information of the page, and resubmit, if it gets rejected, please detail on what the problem is HenriDeadMort (talk) 01:03, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, I decided to create a source assessment table to keep track of sources, and I encourage you and other editors to help fill in the remaining blanks wherever you can. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 16:45, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added a good bit to the assessment. More questions about reliability and significant coverage remain, for others who want to dig into it. —ADavidB 14:22, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and completed the significant coverage column. —ADavidB 14:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think now the citations are fine. See my edit if its good. @Adavidb :) Nedia Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 18:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the assessment is now up-to-date with the draft's current set of 36 sources. There are still a few reliability questions. Most sources provide significant coverage, which would count toward subject notability, though isn't required for usage by the article. —ADavidB 09:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to me, I assess articles and I have seen articles that no where near the quality of this one. I would rate it at least Start-class and maybe even C-class in it's current form. Sheriff U3 | Talk | Con 20:56, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinster300: The amount of references that have been assessed as definitely helping Barron towards notability (26) is greater than the total amount of references cited on the Kai Trump article, not to mention that the "not inherited" argument has failed to get the latter deleted in the past. If you decide to take a look at the source assessment table and suspect some of the green tiles to be strawgrasping, feel free to try correcting them. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a general view: I think AfC reviewers should be leaving comments past the canned template message on the 2nd+ decline. SK2242 (talk) 13:21, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear MrPersonHumanGuy and SK2242, thank you for your pings and my apologies for any disruption caused. My decline was in agreement that it is difficult to disentangle the subject from his father's presidency in any significant way, even with reliable sources, to establish entirely independent notability. If my decline was disruptive, I am happy to revert the draft to its previous version, or resubmit it for another reviewer to take a look. Kind regards, Spinster300 (talk) 15:26, 16 March 2025 (UTC).[reply]

I never thought your decline was disruptive at all. If by "revert the draft to its previous version" you mean you'd undo your decline, then thanks for offering to do so. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 15:35, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The comeback regarding lack of significant coverage was unexpected, apparently with no regard for the source assessment. —ADavidB 17:30, 17 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm completely new to this draft and I stumbled here after editing Kai Trump. Now, I think her notability is on shaky grounds, but she has her on YouTube channel with over a million followers and what is apparently a fledgling (or at least lucrative) golf career. Even if her fame is based on lineage, she now has something that's verifiably hers. I don't know that you can say the same for Barron.

Most of the independently verifiable information in the draft is basic biographical data that don't establish his notability. He attended a prep school in suburban DC! He likes soccer! He didn't serve as an RNC delegate! (I have no idea why any of that is in the intro paragraph)

On the other hand, the stuff that could establish his notability feels pretty sketchy. He and a podcaster are "edited with aiding the Trump campaign in its attempts to appeal to young voters" but by whom? And in what capacity? He made suggestions that helped his father win the 2024 election. According to whom? His mom and dad. He was involved in Martin Shkreli's Trump-themed memecoin. Says who? Martin Shkreli! The point is, Barron's notability is almost entirely dependent on people who are interested in establishing Barron's notability, or people trying to curry favors with said people. And all of this would suffice as sections in articles about his father or the 2024 election

So even if this technically passes WP:N, I don't know that there's anything there worth writing a whole article about until he does something outside of his father's politics and described by someone outside his family/campaign insiders. Adeletron 3030 (talk • edits) 19:22, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]