Jump to content

Talk:Personal and business legal affairs of Donald Trump

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Abuse of lead[edit]

The lead is being misused as a place to post the latest lawsuits. It needs to be summarized greatly by moving much of the content to the body and leaving general summaries. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is definitely being abused. If there is no objection, I will work on condensing the lead soon. A very large amount of it will be taken out. It should only include broad statements about his lawsuits and brief summaries of the most important ones. JoeJShmo💌 23:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding: Personal and business legal affairs of Donald Trump[edit]

Unfortunately it appears that this article was deceptively edited in the leading sentence.

From the 1970s until he was elected president in 2016, Donald Trump and his businesses were involved in less than 3 legal cases in United States federal and state courts…

“less than 3 legal cases” was previously correct in saying “over 4,000 legal cases ” and was edited. 2600:6C67:237F:C03C:5575:1705:7433:EDE6 (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks for flagging the vandalism. Acroterion (talk) 19:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find relevant cases[edit]

Can there be a table in the leade listing all the cases/dates and their statuses? 207.96.32.81 (talk) 01:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poll watching controversy[edit]

I nominate the entire 'poll watching controversy' for deletion. All we have is that a judge, in regards to an investigation into poll watching incidents, asked the RNC to release communication with the trump campaign. I don't see any references to support that the request even led to any litigation against Trump. Nor Trump himself nor his campaign were ever directly litigated against in regards to poll watching incidents, and it is totally uncalled for to use this Judge's request as a stepping stone to include an entire irrelevant section on a controversy involving 'Trump supporters' in an article on Trump's legal cases. I could not make my objection more clear. I will remove it in a few days, and until then I'm open to hear any objections or support. JoeJShmo💌 10:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]