Talk:Joe Biden - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Czello (talk | contribs) at 21:54, 22 April 2023 (Reverted 1 edit by 172.56.105.66 (talk) to last revision by Larry Hockett). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:54, 22 April 2023 by Czello (talk | contribs) (Reverted 1 edit by 172.56.105.66 (talk) to last revision by Larry Hockett)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Joe Biden article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19Auto-archiving period: 21 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Template:Vital article Template:WikiProject Joe BidenPlease add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

U.S. Congress High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) Person(s).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Delaware / Presidential elections / Presidents / Government Top‑importance

	United States portal This article 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 Misplaced Pages. 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Delaware portal This article is supported by WikiProject Delaware (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics: American High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

College football Bottom‑importance

	College football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football
Bottom	This article has been rated as Bottom-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Science Policy High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Barack Obama (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Barack Obama, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Barack ObamaWikipedia:WikiProject Barack ObamaTemplate:WikiProject Barack ObamaBarack Obama

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Joe Biden. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Joe Biden at the Reference desk.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Joe Biden was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 18, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
September 19, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
April 22, 2020	Good article reassessment	Delisted
June 28, 2020	Good article reassessment	Delisted
October 4, 2020	Good article nominee	Not listed
Current status: Delisted good article

Other banners: Top 25 reports; media mentions; pageviews; section size

Top 50 Report and Top 25 Report annual lists

This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 82 million views since December 2007.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2020 and 2021.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 20 times. The weeks in which this happened:

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Brian Krebs (August 29, 2008). "Misplaced Pages Edits Forecast Vice Presidential Picks". The Washington Post.
(none) (August 17, 2009). "The 50 most-viewed Misplaced Pages articles in 2009 and 2008". The Daily Telegraph.
Maxwell Tani (May 15, 2015). "Meet the guy who has protected Hillary Clinton's Misplaced Pages page for almost a decade". Business Insider.
Alex Pasternack (March 7, 2020). "How Misplaced Pages's volunteers became the web's best weapon against misinformation". Fast Company.
Kalev Leetaru (April 29, 2020). "Biden vs. Kavanaugh: How the #MeToo Numbers Stack Up". Real Clear Politics.
Mayank Aggarwal (July 16, 2021). "Nobody should trust Misplaced Pages, says man who invented Misplaced Pages". The Independent.
Madeleine Spence (August 1, 2021). "Larry Sanger: 'I wouldn't trust Misplaced Pages — and I helped to invent it'". The Sunday Times.
Jack Beresford (September 2, 2021). "Misplaced Pages 'War in Afghanistan' Article Describes It As a 'Taliban Victory'". Newsweek.

Section sizes

Section size for Joe Biden (63 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	9,552	9,552
Early life (1942–1965)	9,050	9,050
Marriages, law school, and early career (1966–1973)	10,599	27,199
1972 U.S. Senate campaign in Delaware	1,826	1,826
Death of wife and daughter	3,828	3,828
Second marriage	8,342	8,342
Teaching	2,604	2,604
U.S. Senate (1973–2009)	74	39,489
Senate activities	19,310	19,310
Brain surgeries	2,434	2,434
Senate Judiciary Committee	6,590	6,590
Senate Foreign Relations Committee	5,856	11,081
Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq	5,225	5,225
1988 and 2008 presidential campaigns	44	16,364
1988 campaign	10,829	10,829
2008 campaign	5,491	5,491
2008 and 2012 vice presidential campaigns	49	27,980
2008 campaign	12,057	12,057
2012 campaign	15,874	15,874
Vice presidency (2009–2017)	77	38,370
First term (2009–2013)	23,882	23,882
Second term (2013–2017)	10,009	14,411
Role in the 2016 presidential campaign	4,402	4,402
Post-vice presidency (2017–2021)	6,681	6,681
2020 presidential campaign	78	31,911
Speculation and announcement	3,490	3,490
Campaign	22,421	22,421
Presidential transition	5,922	5,922
Presidency (2021–present)	133	191,131
Inauguration	6,205	6,205
First 100 days	13,050	13,050
Domestic policy	9,091	75,090
Economy	19,243	19,243
Judiciary	5,690	5,690
Infrastructure and climate	13,835	13,835
Immigration	11,500	11,500
Pardons and commutations	3,271	3,271
Pardon of Hunter Biden	6,021	6,021
2022 elections	6,439	6,439
Foreign policy	5,772	57,693
Withdrawal from Afghanistan	11,473	11,473
Russian invasion of Ukraine	12,113	12,113
China affairs	10,192	10,192
Israel–Hamas war	14,104	14,104
NATO enlargement	4,039	4,039
Investigations	23	13,988
Retention of classified documents	5,768	5,768
Business activities	8,197	8,197
Age and health concerns	7,291	7,291
2024 presidential campaign	17,681	17,681
Political positions	30,857	30,857
Public image	10,788	19,362
Job approval	7,095	7,095
Media depictions	1,479	1,479
See also	238	238
Notes	138	138
References	17	1,680
Citations	34	34
Works cited	1,629	1,629
Further reading	1,430	1,430
External links	119	11,088
Official	440	440
Other	10,529	10,529
Total	462,520	462,520

NOTE: It is recommended to link to this list in your edit summary when reverting, as:
] item
To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.

01. In the lead section, mention that Biden is the oldest president. (RfC February 2021)

02. There is no consensus on including a subsection about gaffes. (RfC March 2021)

03. The infobox is shortened. (RfC February 2021)

04. The lead image is the official 2021 White House portrait. (January 2021, April 2021)

05. The lead image's caption is Official portrait, 2021. (April 2021)

06. In the lead sentence, use who is as opposed to serving as when referring to Biden as the president. (RfC July 2021)

07. In the lead sentence, use 46th and current as opposed to just 46th when referring to Biden as the president. (RfC July 2021)

08. In the lead section, do not mention Biden's building of a port to facilitate American aid to Palestinians. (RfC June 2024)

Prose

"Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, which codified protections for same-sex marriage and repealed DOMA and the CHIPS and Science Act" it took visiting the CHIPS and Science Act page to realise that it was not among the repealed acts. This could be worded better. 2001:8F8:172B:49C3:24AC:2EBD:229D:F1BE (talk) 18:19, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

That phrase was removed, addressing your issue. But I definitely think the lead should mention the CHIPS Act; it's a pretty huge policy, and one of Biden's signature achievements. DFlhb (talk) 00:43, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

@DFlhb: I went ahead and added CHIPs to the lead. Iamreallygoodatcheckers 01:12, 6 March 2023

I think there should be a separate place for his achievements in the general article. The fist part already reads more like a Biden praise page than a neutral article.Bjoh249 (talk) 18:43, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Reality

What - no observation that he was elected the the largest percentage of the eligible vote in history? He's the most popular presidential candidate ever, in all of US history. No discussion of that? He got 81 million votes, he was also elected defying the "Bellwether counties." This is an exceptionally notable president. Who could have guessed he could be elected?

sources? Slatersteven (talk) 13:26, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Dude, much of this article already reads more like a Biden campaign ad than a neutral encyclopedia article. It’s already mentioned how many votes he got in 2020. That also doesn’t make him the most popular president in history. His approval rating has been stuck in the low 40s since 2021. I’m not saying I support or don’t support Biden, I’m just pointing out this article lacks a lot of neutrality.Bjoh249 (talk) 18:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Voice file

I question the judgment call of including a voice file of Biden right after he caught COVID; COVID is well known to cause someone's voice to sound different, and to my ears, that's reflected in the audio file.

There's a second related issue; Biden's speech patterns have changed quite significantly in recent years (due to normal aging; among other things, it's slower than it used to be), and I think a "representative" voice sample should ideally come from earlier years, for example 2012 (is that Biden-Ryan debate freely licensed?). The only point of a voice file is to illustrate a person's normal timbre, pitch, loudness, cadence, phonation, etc, and we must strive to be neutral and representative of the overall person; a voice recording at an advanced age is IMO not the point here, regardless of which period of his life is most notable. DFlhb (talk) 16:00, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

It would be best to include his voice as US president. But, not while he had covid. GoodDay (talk) 16:19, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand why we need a voice file for Biden. His voice is not of particular significance to his notability or public image. Not to the extent of Trump or Obama for example. Also, yea, an audio of file of when he had COVID would not be optimal. Iamreallygoodatcheckers 19:58, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't think we should adopt elaborate inclusion criteria for voices (and significance to notability or public image is pretty fuzzy/subjective). It's unnecessary and will just lead to endless talk page arguments. AFAIK, the only criteria we apply for signatures is: if it's freely-licensed, add it. Since I guess we're now adding voices, they should be treated the same. DFlhb (talk) 22:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I just realized the extent in which we include these audio files. It's every president since they started recording stuff pretty much. I suppose there isn't standard for inclusion, just whether it's freely licensed. Iamreallygoodatcheckers 01:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

It's obviously subjective, but his voice sounds pretty normal to me in the Covid clip. I agree with GoodDay that if we have a voice clip, it should be from his Presidency. If you want to hear what Biden's voice sounds like when it's abnormal, you can watch this video from a time when he had a cold. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I think it might be better if the voice file present was more representative of his presidency or a notable accomplishment. I have attatched an audio file titled: Joe Biden gives remarks on the Inflation Reduction Act.ogg

Here he gives his prepared remarks in regards to the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act (the date of the video is from July 28th 2022). I think this audio file might be a better fit for his profile as it is representative of one of his most significant policy accomplishments that is of a similar weight to the other U.S. presidents where they're either Announcing military actions (Trump, Obama, Clinton), or announcing policy advancements (Carter and Reagen). I think that this audio file doesn't have any real concerns about audio issues or his voice being abnormal due to sickness. As such, I think it might be a bit more appropriate for his profile. LosPajaros (talk) 01:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

We should have an audio clip from the Battle for the Soul of the Nation speech. It's a pretty significant speech. FunnyMath (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree, however, that speech is about 20 minutes long so it would likely be better off as a video clip established further down in the actual article itself then as the voice box LosPajaros (talk) 19:28, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

I mean use a small audio excerpt from the speech, not the entire speech FunnyMath (talk) 22:54, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 April 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the Vice-President section, the article states Biden met with Serbian President Vucinic in 2016. In 2016, Vucinic was Prime Minister, not President. It's even written in the already linked source. 188.155.68.62 (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Done--RegentsPark (comment) 18:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Abortion in the Lead

Considering Biden's abortion executive orders have negligible impact on the availablility of abortion in places impacted by "near-total bans on abortion access passed in a majority of Republican-controlled states," and the fact that this is literally one sentence in the body, I think this is completely UNDUE for the lead. Bill Williams 23:29, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The sentence doesn't even state what "measures" Biden took because he has nearly zero power to do anything affecting abortion access in Republican controlled states that completely banned it, and most of the sentence is just stating that the Supreme Court made a decision (unrelated to Biden, whom the lead is about) and that Biden criticized it (if you seriously think Biden saying something is DUE for the lead when the lead is entirely about his life and actions, that shows how irrelevant this content is). Bill Williams 23:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Agree that mentioning abortion is UNDUE for lead. Andrevan, in response to your edit summary, yes, abortion has been is a salient political issue since Dobbs, but that doesn't mean that Biden has done anything significant to advance abortion access. The issue has been concentrated more so on the Supreme Court, state legislatures, and perhaps Congress, considering the midterms, but not so much on Biden or his presidency. First and foremost, there is very little about Biden's response to Dobbs in this article; in fact, the sentence in the lead is the exact same sentence as the one sentence about abortion during his presidency that can be found at the bottom of the political positions section. There's nothing else. It's pretty standard rule that content not substantial in the body shouldn't be in the lead; that's even more true for someone as significant as the president of the United States. I even went and checked out Presidency of Joe Biden#Abortion and there isn't much of significance about his actions regarding abortion there either. Furthermore, I'm really struggling to see how individual states choosing to prohibit abortion is related enough to Biden for a lead mention.

For this material to be included in the lead it's going to need to be established that it's due and that onus is on those who support including the content. This is new content and it needs to removed till a consensus can be obtained Iamreallygoodatcheckers 23:54, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, ok, I get it. Consider the new material challenged. I didn't mean to offend anyone. Andre🚐 00:08, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I think you should self-revert and remove the challenged content from the lead because of the reasons stated above. If anyone thinks it should stay, then I would like to see an argument in favor and the addition of some actual content to the body of the article, rather than having literally one sentence in the body and one in the lead when all other content in the body is 100x as long as the lead. Bill Williams 00:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

~~Didn't you revert it already? Andre🚐 00:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC)~~ Nevermind, I see that was a different edit. Andre🚐 00:19, 12 April 2023 (UTC) Because you edited after I did, I cannot easily undo the edit. If you want to revert it you may consider it my acceptance of your challenge and not an out of process revert. Andre🚐 00:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Understood, thanks for the discussion. I do think more content could be added about abortion in the article, but sourced content must be added before anything is mentioned in the lead, otherwise there is nothing in the body for the lead to summarize. Bill Williams 02:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Categories: