Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Age and health concerns of Joe Biden

Age and health concerns of Joe Biden

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unnecessary content fork, inappropriate WP:SPINOFF, hyper-fixating on the news-of-the-hour. There's nothing here that cannot be covered by a short mention at Joe Biden, and a bit more at Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Note that there was once at attempt at a similar article for Mr. Trump, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump. Zaathras (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Zaathras (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator's rationale, as well as WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOPAGE. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 12:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing !vote to Keep after finding the numerous subsequent arguments persuasive. ~~This is clearly heading into WP:SNOW territory.~~ A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 00:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep as the article stands it would warrant deletion, but I think the issue is article worthy in the wake of his debate performance. This is the most embattled a (presumptive) nominee has been since the Donald Trump Access Hollywood tape incident in 2016, which has its own article not to mention that Biden has been dogged with questions about his cognition since even before he ran in 2020 and up until recently was dismissed as bad faith attacks by his opponents. In the last week, that is no longer the case.
If the article can be fleshed out, it should be kept. PaulRKil (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and United States of America. Shellwood (talk) 13:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Is this article going to have any staying power? If anything else develops on the subject, perhaps more can be added. I support Draftify at this point until/if more can be cohesively developed on this subject. BarntToust (talk) 13:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think life (events) will quickly develop this article. Unless Biden resigns, the days and months will roll on and every health incident will be scrutinized. When he resigns, health problems will be the reason for his resignation – an important event and also a detailed analysis. There is no need to rush into deleting the article. Then we will need to restore. Wikipek (talk) 14:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and consequently restore Health of Donald Trump, which was merged/redirected pursuant to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump. Both articles covered much the same kinds of concern. BD2412 T 15:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I agree with this. Trump and Biden's health and age have both been extremely scrutinized over the years. MarkiPoli (talk) 17:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The creation was a bit hasty and puts us in news territory, which is not great, but if GnocchiFan keeps adding 1-2kB a day it will be hard to justify deletion(they're the one who created it). The Trump matter needs its own discussion, it's an old one and tit-for-tat is a bad look. Trump doesn't have the media jumping on him for this, and he didn't stand gerbil-eyed with his mouth agape at the recent debate. [1] SmolBrane (talk) 16:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SmolBrane: The significance of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump is not with respect to the tit-for-tat issue, but with respect to the specific points of discussion raised there that are applicable to this discussion, specifically the assertion made in that discussion that we should not have any freestanding articles on the health of current public figures, and that Wikipedia should follow the Goldwater Rule prohibiting medical professionals from commenting on the health of public figures who they have not personally examined. A great many participants in that discussion supported imposing such a rule, which would obviously vitiate inclusion of comparable medical opinions about Biden absent personal examination. I opposed the imposition of that rule in the Trump discussion, and would oppose it here equally. We are in an historic moment of having two octogenarian presidential candidates, and the Trump article, at the time of its deletion, had dozens of high-level sources commenting on issues with regard to Trump's health, so it is a fair bellwether for the admissibility of the Biden article. BD2412 T 18:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am simply uncomfortable turning this AfD into a discussion about that other guy's AfD. WP:WAX applies and I'm not convinced the situation with Biden is adequately symmetrical for Health of Donald Trump !votes here. Once this discussion closes we could have a similar one regarding Trump imo. Note that Biden wasn't mentioned once on the Trump AfD. Regards SmolBrane (talk) 19:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SmolBrane: The shared underlying questions remain open, however. 1) Should Wikipedia have articles on the "health" of living public figures at all? 2) Should Wikipedia be bound by the Goldwater Rule, which prohibits reporting opinions on the heath of individuals by persons who have not conducted an examination of those individuals? BD2412 T 02:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The irony being--the Goldwater Rule article on this wiki allocates its largest section to a particular former American president(and no one else), observed by someone on the talk page as essentially a coat rack. The goldwater discussion should occur elsewhere if it's going to be a policy. This is headed for a speedy close. SmolBrane (talk) 00:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With how his health and age might end his time in office, I think you have to keep it. Vinnylospo (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with the insistence that it be improved to the point of being brought in line with the encyclopedic nature and aims of Wikipedia. I was a proponent of the creation of this article, but it really was launched too quickly and improperly. As I said on the talk page for Mr Biden's campaign, it's good if it enables us to analyze his health and its implications quickly and in real time, in a way that wasn't possible in the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the highly consequential nature of his health, but it can't be treated as a joking matter. At the very least, better must be done for a leading image than to employ a picture of Mr. Biden standing before his lit eighty-first-birthday cake. 216.255.100.62 (talk) 17:32, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's representative of a strategy from the administration and campaign - treat the age issue with humor. We aren't saying it's funny or not funny, it's just emblematic of part of their strategy and consequently part of the page. Maybe not first image, though. MarkiPoli (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is part of a research project, not a marketing campaign.

So long as it's here... Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will move this image further down to the part of the article which refers to the White House response (I think the joke birthday is relevant there). Feel free to choose another image for the lead and add some further detail if you see fit. GnocchiFan (talk) 19:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm rubbish at image procurement and insertion. Anyway, wouldn't the thing to do for an article like this normally be to use a picture of him that would normally be used otherwise, his official portrait or a picture of him stumping, or something of the like? Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOTNEWS, or Merge, as was done with AFD Articles for deletion/Health of Donald Trump (ended up a merge). If we do less than that here, it looks like we're playing politics in favor of the other candidate. — Maile (talk) 18:00, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, it really looks like we're are playing politics in favor of other candidate. However, after making the article more neutral (adding opinions about the lack of health obstacles, of which there are many) and perhaps changing the title ("Age and health of Joe Biden"?, "Health of Joe Biden"?), the article can be kept. The topic is very widely discussed, attracts attention and causes consequences at the center of the election campaign, unlike in the case of Donald Trump. Wikipek (talk) 19:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to change to Age and health of Joe Biden when this AfD is over. GnocchiFan (talk) 19:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is that the course of the conversation concerning the health of Mr. Biden is such that discussion on his age is going to be part of and in tandem with discussion about his health, since the end she has already attained has implications for his current health, and maintaining it is key to furthering his age. Since the two subjects have been introduced as a duality, the thing to do is to build both aspects up, so that each can facilitate the furtherance of the other. Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:18, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and restore Health of Donald Trump - Both have received significant coverage in reliable sources and are likely to do so well before and after the current debate news cycle. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 18:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with above Keep both. Fodient (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign, List of Democrats who oppose the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign and 2024 United States presidential debates#Reception and aftermath. Each of the articles are rather weak to stand on its own merits (with the 1st and 2nd article falling under WP:REDUNDANT), but, given that the health concerns described in this article have come to a head in the current political controversy, these 3 articles could together provide cogent context and information regarding the current state of Biden's campaign as described in WP:MERGEREASON. Meanwhile, the section on the June debate on the 2024 article is large enough, at ~3500 words, to be arguably eligible for WP:SPINOFF, especially when accounting for coverage of previous presidential debates (e.g. 2020 United States presidential debates#October 22 presidential debate (Belmont University) at ~1,500 words). Much of this undue weight is due to the sheer length of the "Reception and aftermath" section (~2000 words), which this article would merge neatly with and provide appropriate context for. Baldemoto (talk) 21:27, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those subjects don't have a whole lot to do with one another. How can they stand as a solid unit together, and how would it not eventually makes sense to split them as the topics are grow too big to fit into one article going forward? Tyrekecorrea (talk) 21:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without the media coverage and analysis that has transpired over the past 2 weeks, this topic would not be notable enough to warrant an article under WP:GNG. The reason why this article would be considered notable is because of the June presidential debate, and the flood of consistent news coverage, discussions, and analysis that transpired after the fact. This is plainly evident in the fact that 12 of the 34 citations in this article were written in the past 2 weeks alone. This article is also relied upon to provide the background for Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign. Therefore, it makes sense that these articles should be merged, with this article serving the purpose of providing appropriate context. If the article becomes too unwieldy, it would likely be due to the constant stream of new calls for Biden to step aside, which could remain separate in an article reminiscent of List of Democrats who oppose the Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Baldemoto (talk) 21:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article will continue to be improved with the increasing amount public interest in his high-profile gaffes both domestically and abroad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZR1748 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there is more than sufficient independent sources and coverage now for this. It is impossible to miss, but the original section should still be retained, at least in large part, on the Public image of Joe Biden page. That should not be entirely removed from that page for this page's creation. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added an excerpt from this article on the public image of Joe Biden page, which I think is appropriate if this article stays. GnocchiFan (talk) 11:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- this is a big deal--involving not just Biden but many Democratic leaders, and Republicans too, as well as a lo of reporters and physicians. I think it will permanently change how Americans evaluate older politicians. Rjensen (talk) 03:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a significant matter and has been covered in the media extensively. TheInevitables (talk) 03:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not only has concerns regarding Biden's health been around for a good while now through reliable coverage but this matter has only increased now that many Democrat leaders have called for him to drop out of this year's US election following the June debate with his health being the common denominator and rationale. I propose bringing back the Health of Donald Trump article for the same reasons that I have already described. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 05:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don't think the article about Donald Trump's health should have been deleted either. In this case the coverage is even more universal, and until the election will probably get too extensive to just merge it into the main article without bloating that one. Nordostsüdwest (talk) 16:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a distinct and separate topic, and should not be deleted or merged with the article on his calls to drop out. Both should be kept as articles, as the latter is a recent phenomenon, while his age and health has been an issue/discussion for multiple years. (Ageofultron 17:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - seems to mirror the same discussion happening on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Calls_for_Joe_Biden_to_suspend_his_2024_United_States_presidential_campaign

Whoever closes that should close this Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As just an occasional contributor to English-language Wikipedia (active mainly in German-language WP and on Commons), I will formally abstain here (as I'm not familiar enough with en-WP's practices), but my impression is that this article as well as Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign are rather short (when compared to the Joe Biden main article), not many language versions of Wikipedia have decided to split these topics into separate articles (in this case, only French and Finnish Wikipedia, and in the case of the other article, only Icelandic), and it would make more sense IMHO to incorporate them into the main article and Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Gestumblindi (talk) 20:36, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's the correct place for this information as well. I think I remembered hearing that Ronald Reagan had age and health concerns at the end of his presidency, but I can't see that article being kept if it were created now. SportingFlyer T·C 09:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ This topic was already a subject of discussion in the media before the June 2024 debate, but this topic & the closely related topic Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign have been sucking all the air out of the room ever since then. At least in America's news media, concerns over Biden's age (and by extension his political future) even managed to palpably overshadow the news about the stunning election results in the UK and France. It's hard to argue this is a non notable subject. I'm surprised this is even at AfD. Vanilla Wizard 💙 01:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Changing !vote to Merge into Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election with a redirect as this would make a fine subsection of that article. Vanilla Wizard 💙 19:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is just an essay. There's no reason why this shouldn't be included somewhere on the site, and some of it can be merged, but I think we're confusing news and political commentary with encyclopedic content, and I think this fails the 10 year test. SportingFlyer T·C 09:39, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign. The topic of his declining health and overall viability doesn't need multiple articles. Swinub (talk) 11:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge back to Public image of Joe Biden. Absolutely no need for a separate article here. Can also be merged to the Calls For page. Again, we do NOT need this many separate pages covering closely related topics. Reywas92^Talk 14:32, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per nominator’s and BD2412’s rationales, and Reywas92’s recommendation. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 17:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and merge with preexisting pages on the topic, most notably on the Joe Biden and Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign pages, or any of the other pages mentioned by previous commenters. BootsED (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete obvious politically motivated content fork. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this article wouldn’t be super noteworthy had it not been for the June debate performance. The president had experienced widespread questioning from those on both sides of the aisle as to whether or not he is fit to continue holding office. NathanBru (talk
Delete - severe violation of WP:RECENTISM and WP:NEUTRALITY to dedicate an entire page to a right-wing political talking point and treat it as fact. There's no page about age and health concerns of Ronald Reagan, who was reported to be senile in office and actually had Alzheimer's. Jaydenwithay (talk) 03:29, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jaydenwithay: We do, however, have articles on the Health of Abraham Lincoln, Health of Pope John Paul II, Health of Adolf Hitler, and so on, so these certainly can stand the test of time. We could have an article on the health of Ronald Reagan. It just needs to be written. BD2412 T 18:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A "right wing talking point" that made top Democrats push Biden to step down? Maurnxiao (talk) 09:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Merge Where Necessary There's really no context to this article. It's definitely an important note in the conversation of Biden's current term and campaign, but in a vacuum it doesn't make any sense other than as an extension to those other articles. What happens to this page when he eventually dies? Doesn't pass the time test here. ⠀^tomástomás_tomás⠀talk⠀ 04:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - this topic meets GNG. Biden's health and age concerns is squaring up to be a major issue in the 2024 election and thus has been subjected to significant attention in reliable sources, especially post-debate. There's no article where this can be comprehensibly covered without creating undue weight. Therefore, this fork is appropriate. R. G. Checkers^talk 05:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless a similar article is made called Concerns that Donald Trump is a narcissistic moron. The fact is, this is an unnecessary content fork, we could create endless fork articles about the pros and cons of the major party candidates that get press coverage, as well Concern that a worm really ate RFK, Jr.'s brain.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:51, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Milowent: Not to belabor the point, but the last version of the Health of Donald Trump article that is proposed to be restored in tandem with this article being kept had some discussion of armchair evaluations of Trump having narcissistic personality disorder, as well as commentary on Trump's own estimations of his genius. I think this would qualify for your "similar article" proposition, but for the title. BD2412 T 17:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that context, BD2412, i don't think "Health of Donald Trump" is anywhere remotely similar, but i need an article titled Does J.D. Vance Know Trump Almost Had His Last Vice President Killed? to feel this should stay. I fully admit to having a very biased view of Trump, which is also 100% correct.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 18:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not seen any media coverage anywhere about J.D. Vance's knowledge of Trump supposedly wanting to have his previous vice president killed. On the other hand, Joe Biden's age and health has been a central part of his public image and presidency, and it has indeed resulted in the end of his re-election campaign. Maurnxiao (talk) 09:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not everything needs an article Cwater1 (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that, indeed False or misleading statements by Donald Trump is already an incredibly long article and some people are saying it will become our longest article ever. We will see.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 17:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep, this article has received steady coverage for quite some time now. Concerns over Biden's health have been raised since the start of his 2020 campaign, it's hardly "news-of-the-hour". Additionally, Wikipedia is built off consensus, not precedent. The deletion of a similar article on Trump is irrelevant.

Slamforeman (talk) 01:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is so much independent coverage of this that it clearly passes WP:GNG as a standalone topic. I am not concerned that this falls into WP:NOTNEWS as this has been an ongoing concern since the previous election, and as BD2412 pointed out, there are articles on the health of other leaders whose time has long passed. The last concern is whether this ends up being a WP:POVFORK, but I don't see why careful editing cannot end up in a balanced take on the subject, and merging with another article does not really change this. Overall, I do not think there is a strong policy rationale to delete the article. Malinaccier (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 17:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MERGE into Public image of Joe Biden. CNC33 (. . .talk) 19:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — At best, an unnecessary article. At worst, a BLP violation. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:55, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Purely factual information such as Biden catching Covid and coverage of his performance at the debate can, and should, be included in his page backed up with impartial citations. These matters do not need a separate article and nor does there need to be one about Trump's health. Wikipedia is in danger of becoming so American-centric and partisan that it will lose further credibility with the wider world. There are plenty of forums on the internet to compile opinions on Biden, Trump and whoever else. This is supposed to be an encyclopaedia for the world not an online battlefield for American politics. Shrug02 (talk) 20:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Impartial citations" - I'm sorry, but our citations are not required to be impartial, but reliable. Many reliable newspapers have their own point of view, and are perfectly acceptable to use as sources. GnocchiFan (talk) 20:48, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia. As such it is meant to be facts not opinions. How anyone can disagree that impartial sources would be better than those with an agenda is beyond me but does rather make the point for me regarding this article. That said I wouldn't be adverse to the salient parts of this article being merged into the Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election article now that events have moved on since my original vote. I stand by my view that there does not need to be a stand alone article about his health. Shrug02 (talk) 00:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to Public image of Joe Biden, while technically WP:GNG, not every BLP violation needs its own spinoff article. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Has plenty of good sources that easily satisfy the WP:SIGCOV requirements. ADifferentMan (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Public image of Joe Biden. I can't imagine any reason why this would need its own article when it's an aspect of the target article. There are no size concerns at the moment, so this fragmentation of content provides no benefit whatsoever. That's why we have WP:PAGEDECIDE. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As it stands, this article offers little information but a lot of text. We all know about his gaffes and general mental decline. Yet, this article cites the same points over and offer and lists an endless amount of examples. All of this can be presented in small and condensed form and give the same amount of information. --DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 18:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Public image of Joe Biden; it's a notable topic and Biden's public image is shaped by his age and health concerns nowadays. Some1 (talk) 15:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge ~~to Public image of Joe Biden~~. We don't need standalone articles on people's health. By nature it could go against WP:BLP and could be easily turned into WP:COATRACK. Keivan.f^Talk 21:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election now that it has become clear he won't be running. Keivan.f^Talk 20:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because it's such a notable topic. So many news articles specifically on his health and mental aptitude. Alexysun (talk) 05:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it has been an integral part of Biden's public image as president and contributed almost single handedly to Biden's withdrawal from the 2024 election. This will be, I believe, a pillar of his legacy. Maurnxiao (talk) 18:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ WP:HEY might be in effect since these health concerns contributed to him dropping out of the race. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Merge a page was written specifically about Biden's withdrawal after I wrote this, and I think this content is better suited there. Unnamed anon (talk) 23:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge this content into the article about the Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election; an expanded section there about age concerns would be appropriate, as it was a contributing factor to the mounting pressure he was facing to withdraw from the race. 72.14.126.22 (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 20:29, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I second this merge idea. --Dynamo128 (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I will endorse merging per above if several reliable contributors volunteer for this - each article is already substantial at this point, and I expect a lossless merge and thereby necessary restructuring will be at least three hours' work. 2A02:8071:184:4E80:0:0:0:AEA8 (talk) 20:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As the creator of this article, I would support a merge into the main withdrawal article and would volunteer to do this, time permitting. GnocchiFan (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for volunteering! I do think that would be the best idea at this point. Doodleooma (talk) 22:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election, Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign or Public image of Joe Biden. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per above, although the merging into Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election is also a suitable option, although I'm concerned the latter option may lead to a substantial loss/pretermission of the article's content, hence depriving readers of valuable information. Southasianhistorian8 (talk) 22:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe some of this article could be merged into Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election & other parts could be merged into Public image of Joe Biden? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is to stay it should be more comprehensive relating to his health such as mentioning the multiple brain aneurisms that he was afflicted with back in the 80's. As of right now it's mostly just about his age and health concerns as of solely his Presidency not actually relating to the totality of Biden's health concerns. LosPajaros (talk) 00:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to whatever suitable articles where this matter is relevant. This topic seems to be better as vital content written for other articles rather than the topic of a separate article. It's needless and perhaps unfair to make a whole article out of what serves well as important parts of existing articles. Do we have similar age/health contents as their own articles for Mitch McConnell or Ronald Reagan or (mental) health article on Donald Trump? 2600:1012:A023:670C:1F0:BD8F:F26F:EAAB (talk) 02:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and delete Most of the non-background coverage is about evaluating the concerns in the context of the election and the then-possibility of withdrawing. This has effectively become a subtopic of Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election. hinnk (talk) 04:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: His health has been a topic by reputable media outlets ever since he ran for the 2020 general elections.In fact, this article is long overdue. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 06:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election §§ Background and Progression. The two articles have the same topic and scope, with this one just having a more detailed background. Otherwise, this just looks like a deletable attack page redundant to the withdrawal article. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 10:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with the Withdrawal page now that it has happened. The calls for him to drop out article has already been merged into it. I also think the list of Democrats who were opposed to his campaign should also be merged into the withdrawal article, but that's tangential to this discussion. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 13:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge in the absence of a Jed Bartlet-style diagnosis cover-up. Danish Ranger (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with the withdrawal page as it's already covering much of this, and the rest would be as useful there. — Alien333 (what I did & why I did it wrong) 14:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with withdrawal page per Keivan.f and others. The concerns almost entirely stemmed from his intent to run again and that culminated in him dropping out, so this would all be more useful in that article. Sock (~~tock~~ talk) 14:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - event was the primary reason Joe stopped running! This is notable

DimensionalFusion (talk) 14:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]