Talk:Family of Joe Biden/Archive 1

Archive 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Biden family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150601010652/http://bigstory.ap.org:80/article/cd7d717ab72b486a946602ca6c27280c/biden-announces-death-son-beau-brain-cancer to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/cd7d717ab72b486a946602ca6c27280c/biden-announces-death-son-beau-brain-cancer

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 29 March 2014

The following discussion is an archived 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: Moved per natural disambiguation. (non-admin closure) ^walk victor falk ^talk 10:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

---

Biden (surname) → Biden family – This article solely lists people in Joe Biden's family, so it seems that this is not a surname article, but is instead a family article, so should be renamed and rebuilt/expanded like the Roosevelt family or Bush family 70.24.250.235 (talk) 08:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• No objection, as there are currently no other pages about people named Biden, but keep a redirect categorised under "surnames". – Fayenatic London 12:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
• Weak no objection. Are we sure that there are no other Bidens? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:57, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

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.

Why is this an article?

It just rehashes what's in the Joe Biden article, and doesn't even include info on his parents and siblings.

It should be deleted.

2606:6000:FECD:1400:9071:4AFD:D2F0:53BF (talk) 23:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Working on improving it. Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

All first families of the united states have articles, that's why it needs to exist, even if it's in poor shape. RobotGoggles (talk) 14:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Family Photo

Is there a free photo available that can be used in the article's infobox? I've been looking, and all I can find is a photo from Getty Images from the 2020 Democratic National Convention. That, of course, is not free content, and I'd rather not invoke fair use on this article. Presumably, the Biden family will be present for his inauguration, but that's several months away. If anyone has a photo they've taken themselves, perhaps that would work, or if you can find a free photo of the family members together that would also work. RobotGoggles (talk) 16:19, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Why only living family members in the infobox?

RobotGoggles writes in an edit: "Removed dead members from the infobox again; of course they're notable, they have entire sections of the article dedicated to them. But the infobox is early for Current Members, not Former Members of Joe Biden's family."

I don't see the logic of this rule. We wouldn't apply it to a family that lived 70 years ago, so why apply it today? ciphergoth (talk) 16:52, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Either we include Naomi Biden, or we don't include any of the deceased family members. We can put them in "Connected Members", but they are no longer members of Joe Biden's family, and thus should not be included in that section of the infobox. RobotGoggles (talk) 17:51, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

When I first edited this page, I added all of Joe Biden's children to the infobox. Later, Naomi Biden was removed, and so I removed Beau Biden. It seems only fair, if we are to include family members who have passed away, we include ALL of them, not just one who happened to survive to adulthood and become attorney general of Delaware. That's completely arbitrary, and takes a stand that Beau's life was more valuable than Naomi's. To be encyclopedic, we need to arrive at a consensus; are we going to include all children in family infoboxes, or not include deceased family members? Those are the two options.

To be clear, removing all family members from the infobox is a non-solution, it only guts the article's infobox of any reason to exist. This is the 46th POTUS' family we're talking about, vandalizing the infobox without engaging in discussion isn't WP:BOLD, it's immature and petty.

These are our two options; Include Beau Biden and Naomi Biden, or do not include either of them. RobotGoggles (talk) 15:38, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I think that drawing a line between living and dead makes no sense at all; there's no reason for Wikipedia to care about that. What Wikipedia cares about is notability. However we're not exactly opening the floodgates here; including both Beau and Naomi is a reasonable stance. ciphergoth (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2021

Under the Paternal Ancestry section, it says "Biden's paternal third great-grandfather, William Henry Biden (1789–1849)"... and " William Henry was the second child and son of James Biden". However, there is no evidence that he had a middle name at all. Only the William Henry Biden from Houghton Cambridgeshire had a middle name. Therefore it should read "William Biden (1789-1849)" and "William Biden was the second child...". P.S. By the way, I am currently doing research to discover the father of Richard Biden (the father of James and grandfather of William).

                      -----------Ken Kinman (kinman@hotmail.com) Kinman2014 (talk) 02:31, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: The content calling him "Henry" is sourced from reliable sources - please see WP:V. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 19:05, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2021: Sources as requested by cn tag

Suggested source/s to replace cn tag. In first Para there is a cn tag on the final sentence:

From 1995 to 2004, he worked at the United States Department of Justice in Philadelphia, first as Counsel to the Office of Policy Development and later as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Here are two sources that say what I think the tag is asking to be cited. Please change the cn tag to one or both. (There is also no cite for the same fact on the main article. Although there is no cn tag on that, you may like to use the same source/s to preemptively cite it in that protected article also).49.177.61.250 (talk) 05:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

References

}} 49.177.61.250 (talk) 05:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done, well found. As a side note, we usually don't need to add a quote to the reference for non-controversial statements. I've added it to Beau Biden as well. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 06:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, User:Volteer1. Assistance much appreciated. (I only put the quotes in my refs so that any editor could see that the sources did contain the required information, and save them having to scour the reports. I wouldn't put them in if I was adding refs directly to the article. I do appreciate you taking the time to give me tips, though: kind words always appreciated!) 49.177.61.250 (talk) 08:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

All good. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 09:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Irish-American history and Irish-American culture categories

According to the introduction and the paternal ancestry section, the Biden family are Anglos who moved from Sussex, England to Maryland in the 18th century. So why are we pretending he is Irish-American instead of Anglo-American? Torchist (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

You would be referring to his paternal side, however his maternal side, whom Biden has shown more affection to, is from Ireland and migrated to the U.S. following the Irish famine. So in short he is both, but he is allowed to choose for himself what he identifies as and he has chosen Irish-American. Get over it. 37.18.134.184 (talk) 10:12, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Marriage or wedding

Please correct the sentence 'were married by a catholic priest', wedding was the only sacrament existing before Abrahan was born. It is not the priest, the peace judge, the councilman, the affidavit who makes a marriage, it is the spouses who give sacrament each other, priesthood only gives an special blessing, indicates the community the union took place, and, in sites as Spain, provides legal documents and attestation. The wrong, harmful concept of an 'authority' who marries people may come from the 'pontifex maximus', head of pagan religion and law in Rome, last caesar offered position, Graciano 2, refused it, he considered charge incompatible with his condition of Christian. In Rome, sadly this is the approach in many sites, everybody was inside a power ladder, head of it reported to another ladder above, and so on, just 'furiosus', insane, possessed, energoumenos in Greek, were allowed out of power pyramid. Salut + 81.44.56.7 (talk) 22:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Update Pets Section?

I think the pets section should be updated to reflect that Major has been rehomed, and that the Biden White House has a new German Shepherd, Commander. One source for this is https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-to-get-new-dog-and-cat-as-current-dog-gets-rehomed. I'm aware Fox News is considered an unreliable source for political news here, so if this counts as political news, you're welcome to find and use a different source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bleh12479 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2021

Change to pets under “Immediate Family” section: “On December 20th, 2021 the Biden’s were given a pure-bred German Shepherd puppy, named Commander. He was a gift to the Biden’s by Biden’s brother James Biden and sister-in-law Sara Biden.” Jaonrd96 (talk) 04:51, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:08, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Descent

Joe Biden have polish descent from daughter of Przemysław I Noszak*

213.108.115.100 (talk) 06:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

• histmag.org

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Joe Biden and his parents in the 1970s.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:22, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2020

Please change "father of an illegitmate child" to "father of a child" to avoid the outdated, judgmental adjective. Thank you. Poppy Deane (talk) 16:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

@Poppy Deane:  Done! GoingBatty (talk) 02:21, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Why do y'all protect this known liar and plagiarist? 2600:1015:B12F:DB28:D829:BDE7:A077:517A (talk) 14:03, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Missing grandchild

Navy Joan Roberts 4 years old by hunter Biden 47.4.5.110 (talk) 20:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Joe Biden's first cousin, third removed.

I did my research about Joe Biden's ancestors and family and to what I found; Edward Biden (1839-1910) of Baltimore, Maryland, who's Joe Biden's great-great-grandfather's youngest brother, had a daughter named Eugenia May Biden (1870-1897), married in 1893 to John Charles Linthicum, a U.S. Congressman from the 4th Congressional district of Maryland, serving from 1911 to 1932, making him Joe Biden's first cousin third removed-in-law.

I don't know if what I'm sending is reliable stuff to you but eh, here's great-great grandfather Joseph H Biden, and and you see Edward Biden listed as "siblings", and you see Edward's daughter Eugenia May Biden Linthicum, and there it explains to you a lot when you see Eugenia May's spouse. I don't know what's more reliable to you but the research I did on Ancestry.com and others matched a lot. Akram GameYT (talk) 07:28, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Akram GameYT, Wikipedia does not publish original genealogy research. Even if a reliable source mentions this, I see zero reason to mention such a distant relative. All humans by definition have a large number of distant relatives, and we do not clog up the encyclopedia with such trivia. Except when it comes to royal and aristocratic families. Cullen328 (talk) 07:37, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

RfC on removal of grandchildren's names

An RfC which will impact whether the names of three minor grandchildren should be removed from this article: Robert Hunter Biden II, Beau Biden, and Navy Joan. Your input at Talk:Hunter Biden#RfC about including the name of Hunter Biden's daughter is welcomed. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I have removed them for now due to the unambiguous BLP issues posed by WP:BLPNAME and the unnecessary inclusion of non-WP:PUBLICFIGURE names; these are people who have been covered in reliable sources without seeking such attention, per WP:LOWPROFILE, which means we should err on the side of not naming them per BLPNAME. See also BLPNAME's admonition that when deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories; such sourcing is lacking here. BLP issues should always err on the side of removal until / unless an unequivocal positive consensus for inclusion has been demonstrated, which isn't the case here. --Aquillion (talk) 17:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

NYT coverage of child

editors need to stop publishing this name prior to consensus. This page will be part of a permanent archive. SPECIFICO talk 03:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Recent coverage in the New York Times including in an op-ed and in a feature piece; shows that (REDACTED)’s story, and her treatment by the Biden family has caught the public imagination. A significant amount of prose has been written about her acceptance as a family member, particularly in the context of commentary regarding Joe Biden and his image. Should we include some very short and simple elaboration about (REDACTED) on this page? If so, what should the prose be? I’d propose: “the circumstances of [REDACTED]’s position in the family has been the subject of considerable media attention. In July 2023 members of the Biden family were criticised for not publicly recognising (REDACTED) as a family member. (REDACTED)’s status as a relation of the family was confirmed through DNA test after a paternity dispute between her mother and father. Her story is a frequent topic of right-wing news media.” with reference links to the NYT op-ed piece, and NYT feature piece discussing this topic While we need to be considerate of privacy, the NYT pieces indicate that the horse has bolted. (REDACTED) is already a public figure. That said, we need to make sure any content about a child is respectful and considered. I might make another proposal later about extended-protecting this page as i think it pretty inevitable that (REDACTED) will be the subject of numerous political attacks in the upcoming election cycle. Jack4576 (talk) 00:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC) Given the resounding decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Navy Joan Roberts, the Wikipedia community has no appetite for the back story of this young child. WWGB (talk) 04:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC) The discussion wasn’t open very long, after being closed speedily for some policy reasons regarding child safety that I think are fairly contestable. (Clearly there is an ongoing disagreement as to whether (REDACTED) constitutes a public figure as can be seen from multiple talk page discussions). What we can say for sure from that discussion is that a standalone article for (REDACTED) would be inappropriate; and that’s the action that was taken. This is about the Biden family page, where I note (REDACTED) already appears to be named Her story has relevance in the context of the Biden family more broadly, hence it might be more appropriate to include some information about the family’s relationship with her on this page. Clearly from the news coverage at least some people think she is a relevant topic in the context of the broader Biden family. (e.g. the NYT op-ed: “It’s seven grandkids Mr President”) I’m hoping we can have a good-faith discussion here. It’s at least worth having a proper discussion on this topic now prior to the heat that will be generated in the forthcoming presidential election cycle. Jack4576 (talk) 05:25, 13 July 2023 (UTC) For my part, I want to apologize to the page creator for speedily deleting the article less than three hours after nomination. The article itself seemed well-written and well-cited, if about a minor child of low visibility. The presented sources however appear to be using this story to embarrass the father (as a "deadbeat dad" who has paid $750K+ in support) and by extension the grandfather (who "refuses to acknowledge" the relationship). This is coordinated political coat-racking, and it was happening a long time before User:Jack4576 created an article out of these extant sources. The Bush daughters went through it (portrayed as "party girls" with Secret Service protection), and Al Gore III was the subject of seven AfDs (notable for smoking marijuana and speeding in his Prius). In the moment I was acting in what I saw as Wikipedia's interest in protecting the minor child, as expressed in the deletion procedure. A mature process on this subject is likely to draw partisans like dung draws flies. This is the nature of America's "gotcha" political news coverage. I might have short-circuited it last night, but not forever. BusterD (talk) 11:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC) I see flies accumulating. BusterD (talk) 12:34, 13 July 2023 (UTC) That's okay BusterD I could tell that your deletion was in good faith and reasonable. I respectfully disagree with your comment that "The presented sources however appear to be using this story to embarrass the father". I don't think that was true of the NYT coverage, neither the feature piece nor the op-ed. I think its quite understandable that (REDACTED)'s case has captured the public imagination given that a significant section of the public appears to empathise with her apparent rejection from what is the USA's most prominent and powerful family. I think analogies can be drawn with the narrative of princess Diana Of course, the right-wing press is attempting to use this as a smear. Both for the dead-beat Dad narrative, and also to exploit an apparent lack of warmth toward the child by her biological narratives. For that reason, I minimised any use of those sources aside from a perfunctory remark that she has been the topic of a large amount of coverage. I note that the unusually high volume of coverage on this topic was mentioned within the New York Times feature piece. I think its quite understandable that the public would empathise with a four-year-old girl knowing that her grandfather is the president, and yet not having an opportunity to interact with him. As noted in the NYT piece, the exclusion of this granddaughter from family life (such as in the dedication within Jill Biden's picture book) further adds to this empathy. For that reason, I am unsurprised that there is a great deal of coverage of this story, (enough to make her notable); and I think the inclusion of this story on Wikipedia, in a very considered respectful way is warranted. There would be a fair number of readers of our great encyclopedia out there that would be curious about the first family; and what their relations with each other tells us about them. An aspect that makes this story about the granddaughter different to the Bush/Gore examples you mention; is that those children became notorious for things that they had done. That isn't the case here. Here, we have a child who has been made notable due to perceived actions against her, by undeniably notable people. The story really is about the Biden family and the way they treat their relations; rather than being about the child as an independent subject, although one must know who she is to fully appreciate the story. Jack4576 (talk) 13:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC) I've done a lot of reading this morning. IMHO this is the Obama tan suit controversy writ large. The tabloid press must have something to rant about, and they've latched onto this unfortunate child because they don't have any substantive arguments against the current president's policies, and the previous Hunter Biden smears weren't sticking. That's coatracking. This is a story about how corporate media in a maniacal search for profit uses preconception and resentment to frame a false narrative against a quasi-public figure. They'd be doing it against anybody close to the current White House if it gets them pageviews. This is pointing a camera into a toilet, calling it stinky, and charging folks to see the photo. This concocted narrative is entirely about winning elections in 2024, not about any sense of well-being for the child. BusterD (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2023 (UTC) I don't agree. I don't think this is akin to a person's sartorial choices. This story is about family, and treatment of relations. I'm unsurprised something so near-universal has captured the public imagination. I think this is in the genre of princess Diana stories (although obviously much less prominent; nevertheless, within that narrative genre) I don't think its fair, or reasonable, to describe the coverage we're seen from the NYT on this story a 'concocted narrative' or 'about winning elections'. That isn't usually characteristic of that paper, especially around mainstream, generally favoured candidates like Biden Jack4576 (talk) 14:40, 13 July 2023 (UTC) How long have you been reading the NYT? BusterD (talk) 14:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC) Perhaps I should qualify; I don't see the NYT as a paper that generally goes out of its way to push Republican narratives, especially in recent times Jack4576 (talk) 14:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC) I was throwing the paper as a child and the New York Times has been pushing right-wing narratives since long before Eisenhower. The right-wing press loves to say (small L) "liberal media" but business owners make all the decisions about what goes in their product. Ask Rupert Murdock. To the modern right "liberal" means a value not beholden to deep-pocketed interests. Reagan couldn't win a primary these days. BusterD (talk) 15:23, 13 July 2023 (UTC) I think the paper has changed a lot over the years, it’s more firmly in the educated progressive camp now than it was a while back. Or, educated people have left the Republican party. Take your pick. US media has become really partisan of late and this include the NYT IMO That said i’m not an expert on this, i’m just parroting my perception as a humble (vaguely) left-winger from Australia It’s an interesting discussion, perhaps for another time. Let’s agree to disagree, and i’ll concede that you probably have many more years of perception and experience than I Jack4576 (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to note that consensus on whether the name should be published or not; had not been resolved at the time of the above discussion that has been closed. I did not ignore consensus when I used the name in the above discussion Jack4576 (talk) 04:55, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Could we engage an admin to delete any and all mentions of this child's name from this history pages?

It is a child safety concern

Consensus is that we need to ensure her name does not appear here or within Wikipedia's publicly accessible archive Jack4576 (talk) 05:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

The safety concern could affect Biden's re-election campaign, as the Biden family has consciously decided to ignore the child's existence. The President has even publicly stated that he has ‘six grandchildren'. Despite this, the child's name has been routinely cited in reliable sources such as The New York Times and CNN, so I don't understand the rationale for ignoring the name in this article. 2603:8000:3F01:90CD:1450:10C2:838F:7759 (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

the child's name has been routinely cited in reliable sources such as The New York Times and CNN. I cannot find a single use of the child's name at CNN. There was one use in the NYTimes; but it was in a much criticized op-ed, not a news article. This is hardly routinely cited. There has been one RfC and two AfD's overwhelmingly against inclusion. O3000, Ret. (talk) 16:29, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

While the child’s last name is referenced on CNN, the full name is cited on Forbes and The Independent, both of which are recognized as reliable sources. As previously mentioned, these articles are in addition to the above referenced New York Times article.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/06/29/hunter-biden-will-give-estranged-daughter-some-of-his-paintings-in-child-support-settlement/amp/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/hunter-biden-daughter-lunden-roberts-b2262651.html

2603:8000:3F01:90CD:1450:10C2:838F:7759 (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Reporting regarding unnamed grandchild

I've added "Joe Biden has been criticised in the NYT for not publicly acknowledging this grandchild. Her relationship with Joe is a prominent conservative media topic." as sentences following the granddaughter that is the child of Lunden Roberts.

I think this is a fair NPOV way to narrate this WP:WELLKNOWN political topic, and person.

The sources for those two sentences are:

Source 1 - NYT Op-Ed: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/08/opinion/hunter-biden-child.html Source 2 - NYT feature piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/01/us/politics/hunter-biden-daughter-arkansas.html

There are also numerous conservative stories covering this topic at length, but I don't think its worth citing them here necessarily as the stories are generally quite partisan. Keeping it brief in this way also avoids WP:UNDUE Jack4576 (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

You have incorrectly added an op-ed - the opinion of a single person, suggesting it is the NYTimes talking. This is false. It has been reverted and you re-added without discussion. You attempted to start an article about this 4-year-old child and it was halted with an AfD. You attempted to add her name to another article, and it was halted by an RfC. Now you have taken your campaign here making a statement that omitting an op-ed is somehow "political censorship". No, it is not. Self-revert this and discuss. O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

If the issue was only the op-ed, why did you also remove the feature piece that notes the granddaughter is a subject of partisan coverage ? Jack4576 (talk) 01:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I did not suggest it was the NYT talking. I said -in- the NYT, not -by- the NYT

Anyway, in an effort to address this supposed issue, the prose now merely notes the prominent criticism, and the fact that this child is the topic of partisan coverage

To claim this is a backdoor method to mention their name, is an accusation that i’m editing in bad-faith; not to mention completely ridiculous. Her name isn’t there anymore

Given that mentioning her name is no longer an issue (her name no longer appears here) the only reason I can think you would be removing this at this point is your distaste at this story being mentioned at all. Acting on such an urge would be an inappropriate act of political censorship Jack4576 (talk) 01:16, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

But you've mentioned her name at least a dozen times after being asked not to, haven't you? GA-RT-22 (talk) 03:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

No I haven’t. Show me the ‘at least a dozen’ diffs Jack4576 (talk) 04:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not going to bother tracking them all down. Here are eight of them: [1] GA-RT-22 (talk) 04:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

That was before the RfC outcome regarding the use of their name

So I wasn't 'asked not to' by the community prior that point; or at least, what the community was demanding had not yet been determined by consensus Jack4576 (talk) 05:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

the only reason I can think you would be removing this at this point is your distaste at this story being mentioned at all. Acting on such an urge would be an inappropriate act of political censorship. Would you please stop making false claims like this? In all my posts on this subject, I have never said anything like this. O3000, Ret. (talk) 11:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

You have multiple times expressed a distaste regarding the mentioning of this story; using a variety of linguistic approaches. It’s not false Jack4576 (talk) 16:38, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

You cannot read my mind. You must stop these false statements on multiple articles about what my motivations. Not one more time -- understand? And a variety of linguistic approaches is yet another of your unending WP:PAs. O3000, Ret. (talk) 16:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not reading your mind. I've just been reading your comments. You've made the grounds of your opposition to this story being mentioned here very clear. I don't believe I am mischaracterising you. Jack4576 (talk) 12:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

"Biden Crime Family" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Biden Crime Family has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 14 § Biden Crime Family until a consensus is reached. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:23, 14 August 2023 (UTC)