Talk:Joe Biden

Skip to table of contents

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 Wikipedia? 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: 7 days

Template:Vital article

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 Wikipedia, 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 Wikipedia, 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

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 Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

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

Biography: Politics and Government B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia'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 articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	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 B‑class 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 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.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) Person(s).

 Template:WikiProject Joe Biden

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 B‑class 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 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 articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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).

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

Pennsylvania B‑class Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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 B‑class High‑importance

	Politics portal This article 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 articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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 B‑class 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 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.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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 B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy 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.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Brian Krebs (August 29, 2008). "Wikipedia Edits Forecast Vice Presidential Picks". The Washington Post.
(none) (August 17, 2009). "The 50 most-viewed Wikipedia articles in 2009 and 2008". The Daily Telegraph.
Maxwell Tani (May 15, 2015). "Meet the guy who has protected Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia page for almost a decade". Business Insider.
Alex Pasternack (March 7, 2020). "How Wikipedia'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 Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia". The Independent.
Madeleine Spence (August 1, 2021). "Larry Sanger: 'I wouldn't trust Wikipedia — and I helped to invent it'". The Sunday Times.
Jack Beresford (September 2, 2021). "Wikipedia 'War in Afghanistan' Article Describes It As a 'Taliban Victory'". Newsweek.

Section sizes

Section size for Joe Biden (61 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	9,945	9,945
Early life (1942–1965)	9,047	9,047
Marriages, law school, and early career (1966–1973)	10,599	26,470
1972 U.S. Senate campaign in Delaware	1,826	1,826
Death of wife and daughter	3,828	3,828
Second marriage	7,613	7,613
Teaching	2,604	2,604
U.S. Senate (1973–2009)	74	39,457
Senate activities	19,278	19,278
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	27,593
2008 campaign	11,670	11,670
2012 campaign	15,874	15,874
Vice presidency (2009–2017)	77	38,371
First term (2009–2013)	23,882	23,882
Second term (2013–2017)	10,009	14,412
Role in the 2016 presidential campaign	4,403	4,403
Subsequent activities (2017–2019)	6,682	6,682
2020 presidential campaign	78	31,859
Speculation and announcement	3,490	3,490
Campaign	22,421	22,421
Presidential transition	5,870	5,870
Presidency (2021–present)	122	170,794
Inauguration	6,205	6,205
First 100 days	13,051	13,051
Domestic policy	10,073	64,714
Economy	18,225	18,225
Judiciary	5,690	5,690
Infrastructure and climate	13,835	13,835
Immigration	10,452	10,452
2022 elections	6,439	6,439
Foreign policy	5,149	56,644
Withdrawal from Afghanistan	11,473	11,473
Russian invasion of Ukraine	12,113	12,113
China affairs	10,192	10,192
Israel–Hamas war	13,678	13,678
NATO enlargement	4,039	4,039
Investigations	23	13,988
Retention of classified documents	5,768	5,768
Business activities	8,197	8,197
2024 presidential campaign	16,070	16,070
Political positions	31,076	31,076
Public image	10,789	25,065
Age and health	5,461	5,461
Job approval	7,330	7,330
Media depictions	1,485	1,485
See also	238	238
Notes	138	138
References	17	1,677
Citations	31	31
Works cited	1,629	1,629
Further reading	1,430	1,430
External links	106	12,315
Official	440	440
Other	11,769	11,769
Total	448,521	448,521

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)

"Lawyer" in the lead sentence

I know editors involved aren't usually supposed to close a discussion. However, this discussion has stalled for 6 days, and there is not one editor who has argued supporting inclusion of lawyer in the lead sentence. One editor mentioned using another term such as legislator, but that has not been discussed further. The consensus is to not include "lawyer" in the lead sentence, there is no consensus on any other legal term. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:Thomascampbell123 added "lawyer" to the first sentence, making it "lawyer and politician". I have removed it pending discussion. I feel it doesn't belong there because, although he has a law degree, he only worked as a lawyer for a year or two before entering politics. He got his law degree in 1968, was admitted to the bar in 1969, was elected to local office in 1970, was elected U.S. senator in 1972 when he was 29, and has held elected office virtually continuously since that time. A politician, he definitely is. Even a politician trained in the law. But a lawyer? That doesn't really describe who he is. Open for discussion, of course. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section#Biographies states that the first sentence of a BLP should "neutrally describe the person, provide context, establish notability and explain why the person is notable, and reflect the balance of reliable sources." It also says, "...try not to overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject; instead, spread relevant information over the lead section." The fact that he earned a law degree is mentioned in the third sentence of the article, so I don't think it's worth mentioning it in the first sentence since, as MelanieN noted, it's not what he's notable for. Aoi (青い) (talk) 03:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to find a reliable source to show that he was an attorney. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 04:03, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Biden is not described enough as a lawyer in credible sources and he is not notable for his law career. It would be WP:UNDUE to put that he is a lawyer in the lead sentence. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 04:56, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this belongs in the first sentence. He is notable as a politician and elected official, not for his legal career. As noted above, the lead section already mentions, further down (third sentence), that he has a law degree, and that should be sufficient for the lead. Neutrality^talk 15:09, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If he needs to be described as something legal, I'd go with "legislator". That's what he used to do between campaigns, draft, pass and block the law, not dodge, fight, apply or enforce it. Now he's an "executive", which is probably the least likely candidate of the bunch, albeit true enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:45, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

No controversy section?

Was just wondering why there's no controversy section. A lot of other presidents have them and Biden has done some controversial stuff that I think would be enough to make a new section. Pyromilke (talk) 17:06, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pyromilke, see WP:CONTROVERSYSECTION. If other POTUS articles have one, go to those talk pages to discuss how to integrate that material into the appropriate sections on those pages. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at every POTUS bio from FDR to the present, and a couple of random 19th century POTUS articles too. I did not see a single controversy section on any of them. As should be the case. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per the above they are frowned upon, do you have any specific controversies in mind we do not cover already?Slatersteven (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By "controversial," might you mean "stuff some people don't like?" soibangla (talk) 17:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, we don't use such sections in the bios of US presidents. GoodDay (talk) 18:36, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 September 2021

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

On September 17th, Pentagon officials admitted that the drone strike did not kill ISIS-K members but instead killed 10 innocent civilians. 65.183.155.90 (talk) 23:39, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There were two drone strikes. The one currently mentioned in this article, which happened on August 27, is not the one currently being referred to as having killed civilians, which is the August 29 strike. starship .paint (exalt) 10:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added starship .paint (exalt) 14:08, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 September 2021

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

The air strike that supposedly killed isis-k planners was revealed to have actually killed 10 innocent civlians. 64.135.201.49 (talk) 16:59, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — LauritzT (talk) 17:36, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There were two drone strikes. The one currently mentioned in this article, which happened on August 27, is not the one currently being referred to as having killed civilians, which is the August 29 strike. starship .paint (exalt) 10:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added starship .paint (exalt) 14:08, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 September 2021

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at Joe Biden. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{EEp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

A new section is needed about Biden's behaviour with girls' hair and the like. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H5NJZMDumY . 2A00:23C4:4E9F:D101:4453:1CF8:C8A5:1D74 (talk) 13:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yuotube is not an RS, care to show that RS care?Slatersteven (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that "Youtube" is spelled "Youtube". If videos are not reliable, I don't know what are. No one is denying that the incidents took place.

The read wp:rs and wp:rsp and that might give you an idea of what are and are not RS.Slatersteven (talk) 13:50, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/meet-creepy-joe-who-sniffs-hair-rubs-noses-and-fondles-your-face-5d3gg3k56 . The Times is said by

wp:rsp to be reliable.