Talk:Trump (card games)

Redirect

User:162.83.158.202 has reverted the redirect back to an article, with the edit saying that Knock-out Whist is not the same as this game. However, searching "trump card game" yields no good results and [1] says Trumps the card game is Knock-out Whist. Can you provide a source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColourBurst (talk • contribs) 23:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Trump is different from Trumps (note the s). I'm working on finding external sources for Trump but in the meantime, I'd like to continue building the wikipedia page for it with the rules I know. You're welcome to create a 'Trumps' page and have that redirect to Knock-out Whist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattiyeh (talk • contribs) 02:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I can confirm that there is a middle-eastern game called pronounced 'tarneeb' in english, which directed me here. I hope the above-mentioned completes the article! --Xtcrider 03:22, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Revise or Delete

This article is very possibly the ugliest, most confused pile of dung I have every encountered (though not the biggest—that would go to the article "2000s"). I frankly doubt that there are any authentic references to this game. My suspicion is that, when they were a child, someone was taught bridge or another game that involves trump cards, and that they put together this article from their foggy and inaccurate memories. I'm going to delete this or scour it nearly clean if no one fixes it in the next week or so. Unschool 02:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

The German, Danish, Norwegian, Esperanto and Swedish articles on trump cards all link here, and since no such article on trumps actually existed, I put one here. While there may be game sometimes called trump (but usually other names) we shouldn't confuse people over a mega obscurity. 2005 02:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

we shouldn't confuse people over a mega obscurity

• Huh? Unschool 04:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Needs a more general description/explaination

For those of us who don't play card games, but are interested in the phenomenon, would be great. I finally wanted to look this up, because of a Twain quote:

Tell the truth or trump - but get the trick.
-- Mark Twain, _Pudd'n'head Wilson_ (1894)

And I've seen references to it in the Amber series... So I'd like more details on what it's suppossed to mean, so that I can get where the authors are taking off from.
~ender 2007-04-15 09:50:PM MST —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.167.217.162 (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

It's impressive how good a job this article currently does at NOT explaining what a trump is. 130.89.228.82 (talk) 13:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Text From Other Articles

Many trick-taking games contain a trump suit. Cards in the trump suit outrank all others. If trump is played to a trick led in another suit, the highest card of the trump suit (rather than the highest card in the led suit) wins.

Trump may be static or dynamic. Static trump is featured in Spades, where the spade suit is always trump, as well as many tarock games where a separate trump suit (in addition to the other four) is featured. When trump is dynamic, as in Contract Bridge, it is usually declared by the winner of the auction, the right to choose trump being an incentive for players to bid; or in some games, such as Oh Hell and the original form of Whist, it is determined randomly by exposing a card (in this case it's as if the trump was static, but it adds some psychological variety to the game and makes it more difficult to cheat while dealing the cards if the trump suit is only chosen in the end of the deal).

In some games, certain special cards are high trumps regardless of the actual trump suit. For example, in skat, jacks are the highest four trumps.

Some games have more than one trump suit, such as Stortok, in which there are two trumps, with one superseding the other.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.167.217.162 (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

See also

I like how at the bottom of this article it links to race card. --208.114.177.246 (talk) 01:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was see talk:Trump (disambiguation).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

---

Trump (card games) → Trump — Per discussion at Talk:Trump: The card game meaning of the term is the original and most common one. Hans Adler 23:47, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

unrelated metaphorical use

The line that reads "She's not really running for president, she's pulling a Trump. She's pretending to consider it for fame, money, and her reality show." is completely unrelated to the word "trump", it seems more like a joke on Donald Trump. I would remove it, but can't. 89.154.91.60 (talk) 16:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Got it 66.41.128.154 (talk) 04:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 6 March 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved Mike Cline (talk) 13:50, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

---

• Trump → Trump (card games)
• Trump (disambiguation) → Trump

– To reverse this 2010 RM. The attention this page (by either page views or vandalism) is because of Donald Trump. Because of this, this article doesn't seem to be the primary topic anymore. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 00:57, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

• Support. Even if his campaign fails, Donald Trump will continue to be a viable meaning of "Trump" for the time being.  ONR  (talk)  06:27, 6 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old Naval Rooftops (talk • contribs)

• Support. By the same token, Donald Trump should have a prominent place on the dab page. As things are the article is hidden away in Trump (surname). —Xezbeth (talk) 10:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose - the card game term is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with respect to long-term significance, as it has "substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term". If Donald Trump goes on to become president, I would probably reverse this stance, but as things stand now, the long-term significance of the card game term trumps Donald's short term notoriety.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose per Amakuru. While Donald Trump may be the primary topic of "Trump" now, what happens after a few years? sst✈ 14:02, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
  • It can be moved again in a few years. —  AjaxSmack  02:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose for the reasons well-stated by Amakuru. At the moment Donald Trump is no more notable than he has been in the past. Maybe if he eventually holds a public office then there will be good reason for this move. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 15:13, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose, to be re-evaluated if Trump becomes President. Gore does not redirect to Al Gore, nor does Dole redirect to Bob Dole. It is appropriate to have a direct hatnote, as this article currently does. StAnselm (talk) 02:32, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose by analogy with Apple. The generic is primary, if anything is. Dicklyon (talk) 04:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose per the more lasting significance of the concept. That said, if Donald gets the presidency this fall, that might be sufficiently lasting – and earth-shaking – to merit revisiting this. ╠╣uw [talk] 10:50, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose per @Dicklyon; also see Java. Goldenshimmer (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2016

Change the leading hatnote to "This article is about the card trick. For the businessman and 2016 U.S. presidential candidate, see Donald Trump. For other uses, see Trump (disambiguation).".

122.61.62.10 (talk) 07:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Why? StAnselm (talk) 08:10, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Done st170e^talk 21:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Bumping the earlier question:

Why?

The previous hatnote was perfectly functional. This adds additional and incorrect verbiage, since a "trump" is not a card trick.--NapoliRoma (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Request

Move page to Trump (card games); make Trump a redirect to Donald Trump. Trump is now going to be the 45th President of America. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 07:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

oppose, we didn't redirect Bush, did we? The common noun still counts as primary. Arguably (as in Bush) make Trump the disambiguation page. --dab (𒁳) 08:28, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 9 November 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Disambiguate. The nominator's rationale was based on a presumption that a POTUS should be presumed to be the primary topic for their surname. There was little support for that broad principle, and clear evidence that it is not reflected in en.wp's current treatment of the majority of surnames. The uncontested evidence is that current practice is to treat each case on its merits.

There is some support for the proposition that the card game is the primary topic, but a clear consensus that it is not.

There is more support for the treating the American president-elect as the primary topic, but no numerical consensus that it is actually so. The various assertions of primacy for the Donald being "what most readers want" are arguments founded in policy, but unaccompanied by any metrics. The counter-arguments of long-term significance are also well-founded in policy, and also unsupported by evidence.
Since no data was offered to support either view, I see no reason to add more weight to either the long-term argument or the current-usage argument. So on a binary choice between the President and the dab page, this comes down to the numbers.

I also found no consensus on whether the claimed primacy of the POTUS-elect reflected a global perspective on the topic.

Analysing the numbers as a whole, I find that of those who expressed an explicit preference (rather than just making a comment):

• Disambiguation: 22 editors
• Redirect to Trump: 18 editors
• Oppose any move: 9 editors
• Oppose move to Trump, but OK with disambiguation: 4

Given the low level of support for the status quo, a no-consensus closure (which would default to the status quo) would clearly be perverse. However, disambiguation would be supported by 26 editors, against 18 who prefer a redirect to Trump ... so I weigh this discussion as a weak consensus to disambiguate.

The moves to be performed are therefore:

• Trump → Trump (card games)
• Trump (disambiguation) → Trump

However, given the high profile of this issue and the number of links to be fixed, I will delay for three days before performing the moves to see whether a move review is opened. If no review is initiated, or this closure is upheld at WP:MR, I will then implement the move. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:33, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

---

Trump → Trump (card games) – Donald Trump is now President-elect of the United States, convert Trump to a redirect per above. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 08:29, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose (as above), less "triumphalism" please. We did not redirect Bush. --dab (𒁳) 09:01, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose do we seriously want to put a hat-note on the new president's article saying for|the game|Trump (card games)? As Dbachmann above notes, we do not redirect Bush and Carter is a dab page. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:30, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

  However, yes, agree with alternative proposal per three below in moving Trump (disambiguation) to Trump, it should have been there anyway. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:32, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. "Bush" is a flawed example as two POTUSes were named Bush, and many other significant topics are named "Carter", unlike Trump. SSTflyer 10:06, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
  • "Trump" is going to be the "primary" topic in terms of sheer number of page requests for, variously, Donald Trump, his administration, his presidency (etc.), over the next years. I grant you as much, but I am not convinced this is enough for "WP:PRIMARYTOPIC". But I would be amenable to supporting a motion to make Trump the disambiguation page (as with Bush) as a compromise. --dab (𒁳) 10:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support DAB. Opposers above refer to "trump" having more long-term significance, and several cite that he hasn't won the presidency. Well, now Trump himself has long-term significance. Make the primary topic the DAB page. Nohomersryan (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support alternative proposal: Trump should be the disambiguation page. Like someone said above, no-one suggested that Bush should redirect to any of the presidents. MrStoofer (talk) 13:33, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Strong support the alternative: while indeed Donald Trump will be the dominant topic for at least a century, this article should refer to a collection of many items by that name, the US president being only one of them. Arguments Cúchullain mentioned seem to support this alternative above either the game topic or the president. KiloByte (talk) 17:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support - the great majority of readers searching for "Trump" can be assumed to want to read about the president. -- Кукамонга (talk) 14:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support. By no measure is this the primary topic compared to the President-elect, various Trump Organization topics, and even the Major Arcana or trumps.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:22, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
  • I think you will find hat our definition of "primary topic" was phrased carefully, and includes the aspect of "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term." In this sense, there can be no doubt as to the "primacy" of the common noun trump, in common usage since the 1520s. I admit that this is only one of two aspects to be taken into consideration, but your phrasing of "by no measure" seems to ignore it completely. --dab (𒁳) 16:26, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

    Dbachmann, sorry, but that's not correct. There's no article on the noun "trump", so it's obviously not the primary topic among articles titled "trump". Wikipedia currently has trumps in card games at the base name "trump", and that's certainly not the primary topic in either use or long-term significance considering the other things I mentioned.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

• Strong oppose change of primary topic to Donald Trump, but don't mind a dab page. Per others above. Almost no presidents whose surnames are common terms or names have a redirect - Bush, Hoover, Carter, Grant etc. Most are dab pages. And the card game term is a very clear contender for long term significance - more so than Trump himself, who may be heading towards obscurity in 50-100 years.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose move as requested; however, support MrStoofer proposal above.—Laoris (talk) 17:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support alternative proposal - Per MrStoofer and KiloByte, especially after thinking about this move. Yoshiman6464 (talk) 17:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - support dab at basename. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC enduring encyclopaedic value (although concede there's probably no stopping this becoming the PT). Widefox; talk 17:53, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Strong oppose - It's not correct to say that the primary use of the word "trump" refers to Donald Trump. Yes, he won the election, so for the next ~4 years he will be referenced by the media and in political conversations as "Trump", but the word "trump" has been around for a lot longer than Donald Trump. —danhash (talk) 18:02, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
  • He literally became the President of the United States, it's going to be way, way, way, way more than ~4 years. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 18:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support disambiguation page as main - Sure, the word "trump" has been around for a long time. But, after the election, there's no way that "Trump" referring to Donald also won't be around for a long time. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 18:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose; (Weakly) support alternative - there's a lot of entities with the name “Trump” (including those of the man himself), so a disambiguation page seems better. —ajf (talk) 18:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Strongly support alternative - "Trump" should point to a disambiguation page instead of a specific meaning. "Long term significance" should not matter, as the page can be moved back if all other meanings really become irrelevant after >20 years. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support alternative - Agree with some others that Trump should point to a disambiguation page. TheKaphox T 20:30, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - There are over a thousand links that will need redirecting just to support a redirect or DAB. Donald Trump is good enough of a link to support readers. There is already a link on the top of the page to quickly help anyone who needs to go there quickly.--Countakeshi (talk) 20:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose This will require a large amount of link changes, and the concept is more significant in the long term. Pppery 20:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Can't we fix the links using a bot/script with relatively little difficulty? Seems like it should not be that hard of a task. As far as long-term significance of the concept, that's not supported by what we did at Bush. Clearly we've had the plant a lot longer than we had either president, but I think it's hard to argue that a U.S. president is less globally significant than either shrubberies or a term used in card games. agtx 22:45, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support the alternative WTF is Trump, the card game?? Redirect to the disambiguation page already. --Felipe (talk) 22:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support: When people search Trump in the search bar, they expect to be redirected to the Donald Trump page, as he is more famous and popular than a playing card. Doesn't matter that Bush wasn't redirected, Trump is more popular than Bush right now, and I think it should be changed. 2607:FB90:2400:E28D:8582:43EE:FE76:9982 (talk) 23:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support I was actually slightly embarrassed when explaining how Wikipedia searches and what a redirect page was, when "Trump" didn't send me to Donald Trump. 50.188.77.79 (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support As Trump becomes the new president, most people will be looking for him, not a card game. Clubjustin ^Talkosphere 01:26, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose, per precedent that we do not redirect at page Bush. 69.50.70.9 (talk) 02:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose, as long as the word has a meaning that isn't a proper noun, the redirect shouldn't be made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pkukiss (talk • contribs) 04:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support The overwhelming majority of readers searching for "Trump" are looking for the President-elect.LM2000 (talk) 05:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose: His name is not any more synonymous with the word than Calvin Coolidge is with "Coolidge" or Jimmy Carter is with "Carter". I'd have a different perspective if we were dealing with a name like "Jesus", if not only "Hitler". But, this just doesn't fly with COMMONNAME as of now. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 06:34, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support dab page – No acception of the word "trump" is primary topic by Wikipedia's standards. — JFG ^talk 17:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, when your typical user will now expect to see Donald Trump's article, not a card playing term. Nagylelkű (talk) 19:18, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support dab page per previous arguments. StAnselm (talk) 19:49, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support as per everyone above me - Everyone will be searching "Trump" so it makes sense to move this, Hatnotes in this case would just inconvenience everyone. –Davey2010^Talk 22:37, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support dab page. Given the election results, the card term shouldn't get priority over the person. However, given the long history of the use of the card term, I don't think the person is the primary topic either. agtx 22:40, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support dab page per above.  ONR  (talk)  00:05, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support I don't know how a western (if even that) card term is more significant historically to an encyclopedia then the leader of the free world. You certainly won't learn about cards in a school in 30 years. GuzzyG (talk) 00:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support As Donald Trump is dominating the news and even my conversations and conversations I here everyday. In all those headlines and conversations people very often say Trump instead of Donald Trump. Because of this, it would be difficult to imagine that more people would looking for trump cards instead of Donald Trump. Plus compare words that are ex-Us presidents surnames like Bush, bush is common word to use for the plant while trump (trump cards, trumped) is not so common in the English language. And also Bush is still a notable surname to associate with many other people like Kate Bush or the whole Bush family which has important other people like George Bush Sr., Barbara Bush, Laura Bush, Jeb Bush and the surname Trump is usually associated solely with Donald Trump. Red Icarus of Jakarta —Preceding undated comment added 01:46, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support per Wikipedia policies concerning primary topic. Someone searching "trump" is overwhelmingly likely to be looking for the bio article on the president-elect Donald Trump. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:15, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support dab page but no primary redirect per the comments made above. Trump has no primary meaning at this time. CookieMonster755 𝚨-𝛀 03:58, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - bush ≠ trump. A good argument could be made that shrub is the primary topic for "bush", whereas that can't be said about the card game in relation to "trump", in my opinion.— Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 05:25, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose redirect, Support dab per comments above. --T*U (talk) 08:28, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support: Bush is not really a fair comparison at the least because there are two US presidents. --Piguy227 (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support. The argument that "trump card" has anywhere near the long-term significance of a US president is laughable. Calidum ¤ 19:45, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

  @Calidum: great, you have your laugh. But when you've finished, perhaps you'd like to cast your mind forward 100-200 years. WP:CRYSTALBALL maybe, but we can have a good guess. Will Donald Trump still be uppermost in people's minds in 2116 or 2216? And (assuming civilization still exists), will there still be trump cards? My answers would be "no" and "yes". This is the long term significance criterion in a nutshell. Thank  — Amakuru (talk) 12:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

  Cuchullain said this below, but the decision can be revisited in the future if Trump is no longer the primary topic. Calidum ¤ 19:39, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

• Support Donald Trump has been the meaning almost always when the word "Trump" is used for the past year and a half, and will be for the next 8 years.ShadowDragon343 (talk) 21:52, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

That will be the case in the US, but what about Scotland, Italy, Latvia? StAnselm (talk) 22:31, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

I have no doubt it will be the case elsewhere for his victory made headlines worldwide, he also owns numerous properties in other countries. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 23:52, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

• Support The guidelines on determining what the primary topic will be mention usage and longevity. I would agree it is "highly likely" that Donald Trump's article is the one being sought when a user queries "trump." US presidents maintain fame as recognized names for decades and beyond, so the longevity criteria for making Donald Trump the primary article for "trump" is also fulfilled. Darkestshining (talk) 00:37, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose specific redirect, Support dab per comments above. jxm (talk) 01:19, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support but support moving Trump (disambiguation) here instead. At this time, Donald Trump has made its importance to stop this article becoming a primary topic, but can't currently be primary. NasssaNser (^talk/_edits) 01:54, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support, per free-association test. When you overhear someone say the word "trump", the first word that pops into your head is "Donald", not "suit". --Dervorguilla (talk) 09:23, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support - forget Bush, of which there are two. What about "Obama" redirecting sensibly to the president instead of the Japanese city? That city was around centuries before Barack, but be honest, what would people be searching for when they type in Obama in 2050, 2100? Valentina Cardoso (talk) 12:38, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
• Disambiguation Alternative — The very fact that this is producing a lot of debate shows that the only reasonable answer is to point to the DAB page. Whenever there are several plausible, reasonable main pages, you default to the disambiguation. Yes, some of you love Trump and want it to point to him, and some of you hate Trump and want it to point as far from him as possible...but both of you should be able to agree to pointing to the DAB. — Kaz (talk) 19:14, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
• Strong Support per above. MB298 (talk) 00:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose as per above, and in order to make wikipedia great again! Support for a long form disambiguation page. AugustinMa (talk) 15:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support dab page. Even before he was president-elect, Donald Trump was one of the most common uses of this term. Should he be primary? Maybe, but this page certainly should not be. kennethaw88 • talk 07:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support per above. Evking22 (talk) 18:28, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
• Support making Trump the main title header of the disambiguation page. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 19:42, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose People have been talking about the card terminology before Donald was born, and they'll be talking about it years after he's died. Just because it's a popular search term now, doesn't mean it will remain the case in the long-term. Nobody ever gained consensus for changing Bush in the first 7 years of Wikipedia's existence. (Also for light reading, see the "Palin" edit wars documented at WP:LAME). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:09, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
• Comment for those commenting on Donald Trump's long term significance, I don't deny that he has some, as a US president, but I also think his long term significance is lower than the card game term. This criterion was invented to cover enduring encyclopedic topics, such as Apple, which will likely still be relevant 200 years from now. It is not to deny the overarching and long term importance of, for example, Apple Inc., but just to highlight the fact that, encylopedically, the fruit's significance will live on even after centuries, while the corporation probably won't be exactly there in its present form, even though many people will remember it as a pioneer in this age of technology. The same goes for card game terms vs. US presidents. Those from the past tend to fade into obscurity. Calvin Coolidge, Warren G. Harding, Woodrow Wilson, William Howard Taft... sure, many people can name these guys (and many others around the world cannot), but their significance is vastly less than it was at the time of their presidencies.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:26, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Amakuru, ha, if things change in 200 years we can revisit the issue then, but this isn't the primary topic of the term "trump" even now, any more than, say Suit (cards), Spades (suit)s, Flush (cards), Joker (playing card), or Straight (poker) are the primary topics of those ambiguous terms. That dog won't hunt. This topic isn't even the primary topic of Trump card, and the ambiguous topics there are a lot less notable than the President of the United States, his widely recognizable company that predates his birth, various other independent companies named Trump, and historically-significant non-Donald related topics.--Cúchullain ^t/c 15:00, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The example about Tarot trump is not pertinent, the are they are the first historical example of card trump. The name "Major trump" is only a similitude with the occult use of Tarot that call them "Major arcana", but in tarot games they are simple "trump".--Moroboshi (talk) 10:00, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

It is pertinent, it's another article readers may be searching for with the term "trump".--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose notability should be judged on historical base, not on recent events.--Moroboshi (talk) 10:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Can you please explain how a western playing card term is more historically important then a US president who has specifically over three decades branded himself by his last name? One will be taught in schools (encyclopedias/textbooks, funnily enough.) one will not. GuzzyG (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

An encyclopedia is not a textbook and they are many articles topics not covered in school. Regarding Donald Trump, maybe he will be a great presidente, maybe he will be a footnote in history books, I dont have a WP:CRYSTALBALL. --Moroboshi (talk) 05:20, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

"Footnote" name me a textbook who would not include a US President over a playing card term or better yet any book with the playing card term? GuzzyG (talk) 07:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

My error I didn't link the relevant page: Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal.--Moroboshi (talk) 10:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. Pure recentism. Cleveland once meant Grover. Andrewa (talk) 22:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

That's just false. The city was named in the 1790s. Why does Obama redirect to the president other then Obama, Fukui then? What do you think has more a chance of being taught to a child or university student, a US president (who specifically publicizes and uses his last name for everything) or a playing card term? GuzzyG (talk) 07:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Presidential surnames checklist

Alphabetical

1. Adams [twice]
2. Arthur
3. Buchanan
4. Bush [twice]
5. Carter
6. Cleveland [twice, same president]
7. Clinton
8. Coolidge
9. Eisenhower
10. Fillmore
11. Ford
12. Garfield
13. Grant
14. Harding
15. Harrison [twice]
16. Hayes
17. Hoover
18. Jackson
19. Jefferson
20. Johnson [twice]
21. Kennedy
22. Lincoln
23. Madison
24. McKinley
25. Monroe
26. Nixon
27. Obama
28. Pierce
29. Polk
30. Reagan
31. Roosevelt [twice]
32. Taft
33. Taylor
34. Truman
35. Trump
36. Tyler
37. Van Buren
38. Washington
39. Wilson

Chronological

1. Washington
2. Adams [twice]
3. Jefferson
4. Madison
5. Monroe
6. Jackson
7. Van Buren
8. Harrison [twice]
9. Tyler
10. Polk
11. Taylor
12. Fillmore
13. Pierce
14. Buchanan
15. Lincoln
16. Johnson [twice]
17. Grant
18. Hayes
19. Garfield
20. Arthur
21. Cleveland [twice, same president]
22. McKinley
23. Roosevelt [twice]
24. Taft
25. Wilson
26. Harding
27. Coolidge
28. Hoover
29. Truman
30. Eisenhower
31. Kennedy
32. Nixon
33. Ford
34. Carter
35. Reagan
36. Bush [twice]
37. Clinton
38. Obama
39. Trump

Comments

For the record, as of this writing, on November 16, 2016, 33 31 of the above surnames point to disambiguation pages, 4 (Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Obama) point directly to the president, and 2 (Ford and Trump) 4 (Garfield, Cleveland, Ford and Trump) point to another subject. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 15:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

It's actually four; Garfield is about the comic strip and Cleveland is about the city. Nohomersryan (talk) 17:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the correction. I have adjusted the above sentence to reflect the revised statistics. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 17:30, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Should all cases be treated alike? Seems that the foregoing debate is more of a policy decision than a specific move question related to Donald Trump. How are similar cases treated in the other-language Wikis for their key political figures. Newwhist (talk) 12:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Some last names are going to be uncommon enough that a redirect to the president is acceptable, some are going to warrant DAB pages, and some are going to have other unrelated primary topics. Which policy are you referring to? Nohomersryan (talk) 13:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

As stated above, the surnames list is "for the record", since former presidents have been mentioned during the discussion. Wikipedia came into being five days before the end of the Clinton administration and has spent its entire continuing existence under the two eight-year presidencies of Bush and Obama, with the latter being one of the four presidential surnames given a direct link to the main article. The primary relevance of such long-ago surnames as Tyler, Polk, Taylor and Fillmore lies in providing a historical background for this discussion.
As for other-language Wikis, we cannot even agree that such Wikis are pertinent to the English Wikipedia. In the currently active vote proposing that Carl Jung be moved to Carl Gustav Jung, the form used in 67 out of the 71 Wikipedias in which his biography appears, there is uncertainty in obtaining consensus regarding the other Wikis' relevance or ability to provide guidance in such matters. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 14:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Post move

Replying to my !vote above I read That's just false. The city was named in the 1790s. Why does Obama redirect to the president other then Obama, Fukui then? What do you think has more a chance of being taught to a child or university student, a US president (who specifically publicizes and uses his last name for everything) or a playing card term? GuzzyG

I think my comment on Cleveland was misunderstood, but that's just a quibble. And Obama, Fukui (a city of 32,185 people) probably just needs to get used to comments like this.

But as to what is taught to a child or university student, it may depend a bit on geography. There are universities, and even State Universities, outside of the USA, you know. And also children, for that matter. (;-> Andrewa (talk) 14:39, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, i would happen to know. I am in Australia (across the globe) and we are taught about US Presidents too.. Can't say the same about a playing card term though, i've heard similar stories by a lot of international students here too, they've never heard of the western playing card either but they all discuss Trump. GuzzyG (talk) 00:03, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Very interesting... I am also in Australia, and have been involved in the primary school system as an SRE teacher for many years, and went rhough the system myself some years ago. Agree that current affairs, and US Presidents as part of that, are and have long been part of the curriculum. But my impression is that most Australian schoolchildren would also be familiar with the Standard 52-card deck and games played with it (and with subsets, of it such as Euchre and three- or four-handed Five hundred). Not yours?

Did you understand the jibe about State Universities? Don't you think that's funny? Andrewa (talk) 13:54, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

There's a difference between saying the POETUS isn't the primary topic, and saying that trumps in card games are. Methinks a lot of people arguing the second are really arguing the first, which is a far better supported claim. Not everyone in any country plays cards, and not everyone who plays cards plays games that include trumps, nevermind the pageviews showing decisively that it receives only a fraction of hits for ambiguous topics.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:31, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Exactly. But we ended up with a good result despite this confusion. (But should that be PEOTUS?) Andrewa (talk) 09:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2016

trump is now the president Sliimjimmyjj (talk) 00:35, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

 Not done - Not clear what changes are requested - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 00:39, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Page rename

This page should be renamed to Trump (playing card) or Trump (card) rather than Trump (card games). It just sounds better. 173.68.25.111 (talk) 17:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

sexual abuse accusations

This Link Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations seems to have either disappeared from the article or buried in it..this is wrong.107.217.84.95 (talk) 01:00, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

What card game is that part of? Dicklyon (talk) 04:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Origin of the Russian name козырь

• Google Translate says that "kozır" is Azerbaijani" for "will break" (and also "ruff"). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Hatnote

I've replaced the recently added complex redirect with a simple one to the dab page. Apologies for not giving a clear reason at the time. To be honest, when Donald Trump fades from view, this can return to being the primary article anyway. Bermicourt (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks 2600:1006:B066:3AE6:C495:41BE:A0A0:2F70 (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2023 (UTC)