Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Jump to content

Talk:Joe Biden

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleJoe 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
DateProcessResult
September 18, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
September 19, 2008Good article nomineeListed
April 22, 2020Good article reassessmentDelisted
June 28, 2020Good article reassessmentDelisted
October 4, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Delisted good article

    Current consensus

    NOTE: It is recommended to link to this list in your edit summary when reverting, as:
    [[Talk:Joe Biden#Current consensus|current consensus]] item [n]
    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)

    Comparison to Benjamin Harrison

    Apologies if this is pedantic but I can't edit the article, but is this comparison to Benjamin Harrison truly necessary? – "This will give Biden the distinction of being the second president whose predecessor and successor are the same person, after Benjamin Harrison, whose predecessor and successor were Grover Cleveland." Just seems to take up space in the top of the article for no real reason other than being an interesting fun fact, but it doesn't really contribute anything meaningful to the article. I'd consider the same for the Donald Trump article, where he is compared to Grover Cleveland. I think if something happens twice (in this case, a non-consecutive term), then it's not really a notable thing to happen. Castlemore7 (talk) 22:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Agree, takes way too much space for the value of the information. I think it's notable enough for Trump's lede, but not this one, at least not using this much text. WikiFouf (talk) 14:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed it. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    "Announced military support for Israel" in the lede

    This might have been addressed before, but why does the lede mention only that Biden "announced" military support for Israel? This reads as if it was written prior to his administration actually sending the military aid in unprecedented numbers. If no one objects, I would change it to :

    During the Israel–Hamas war, Biden condemned the actions of Hamas as terrorism and sent extensive military aid to Israel, as well as limited humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip.

    While we're at it, I think it's also worth using a couple of words to add that the aid was sent despite allegations of war crimes, if anyone would like to discuss that. WikiFouf (talk) 14:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    It can be argued that as the US has supported Israel since the 1960's its undue to single out Biden. Slatersteven (talk) 14:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think that it's "singling out" Biden because A) no administration has ever sent Israel this much aid in a year, and B) that same year was the deadliest of the entire Israeli-Palestinian conflict WikiFouf (talk) 15:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done, with the swap of "extensive" (from my original proposal) to "an unprecedented amount of", more factual. WikiFouf (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't thing "unprecedented" is the correct terminology to use in the lead. While Biden has been a strong supporter for high levels of military aid, there have been similar meausres of support by prior administrations such as that of Operation Nickel Grass in the Yom Kippur War. LosPajaros (talk) 22:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Never this much in a single year, though, which I think is quite notable. And IMO a factual stat is more descriptive + neutral than just something like "large", "extensive" WikiFouf (talk) 13:24, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Disagree with this. The United States has been strongly supporting Israel for many decades. To imply that this is a Biden creation is not neutral. Esterau16 (talk) 22:35, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Esterau16 Please explain how the sentence implies that this is a "Biden creation"? It states that the amount of military aid sent by the Biden administration since the war started is a record, which is true, as you can read for yourself. WikiFouf (talk) 15:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Unprecedented" is hyperbolic language that suggests there is something out-of-the-ordinary about the Biden administration's support of Israel. Zaathras (talk) 22:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm entirely fine with "record amount" if that makes it clearer, but this is the largest amount of military aid ever sent to Israel by the US in a year. Clearly Biden isn't the first president to support Israel; my proposed sentence isn't saying that either. But the aid he's sent during this war is notable – not only statistically but because of human rights concerns – which is why it's been a front-page news subject for more than a year. WikiFouf (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Response to the State of the Union Address

    I was looking at the "Response to the State of the Union Address" among the succession boxes. My goodness, it's overwhelming. I'd recommend it be removed from this bio & other bios. GoodDay (talk) 02:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Agreed, I didn't know that was there. I removed it. Responding to the 1983 and 1984 SOTU is so far down on the list of significant things done by Biden. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:45, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Transgender rights activists

    This article is on the page. The page features transit, transport, transcripts and the Trans-Pacific, but no mention of transgender. Am I right that categories, especially on BLPs, have to be about things cited in the article, else it's not a defining characteristic worth having a category? Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I removed it. Saying some positive things about trans people does not make one a "trans rights activist". People and their overcategorization.... – Muboshgu (talk) 17:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]