Talk:Beau Biden

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Beau Biden is part of WikiProject Delaware, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Delaware.
Delaware Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This page is about an active politician who is running for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy.

Because of this, this article is at risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.


[edit] Bar Exam

Part of the following was 1st put in by an anon (IP in Deleware, interestingly) without sources, removed by me, then restored by me with a source and exam difficulty information, then I chose to move it here...

It took Beau Biden four times to pass the Deleware Bar Exam, one of the toughest bar exams in the United States.[1]
  1. ^ Barrish, Cris. "Del. bar exam trips many, including Beau Biden (free article preview)", Delaware News-Journal,, October 2, 2006. 

I really don't know if its relevant and important information and might have been inserted into this stub in a POV effort. I don't know. But I moved it here for in case anyone wants to weigh in on it. --Oakshade 00:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I do not believe this is relevant to the article. It seems more of an attack and a POV attempt than information that is important to the article. I say leave it out. Jhawk1024 09:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with Jhawk1024. The above is a fact about Biden's life, so it is relevant, especially considering his current occupation. There are many facts about his life that are not particularly relevant like his best friend in elementary school, the first car he drove, etc. A state's Attorney General's performance in the law and legal matters seems highly relevant. Further, inclusion of a properly sourced fact complies with the NPOV requirement. This information should be included, and I am adding it.

If anything, omitting this fact because it may be interpreted as negative biases the article. Writers and editors of Wikipedia articles—a biography in this instance—are not to act to present or preserve a positive view of their subject. Rather, all relevant information should be included. Please refer to the NPOV tutorial for a more detailed explanation on this point and on achieving NPOV generally.

As is, this article is further biased for the following reasons:

  • Biden's time as a federal prosecutor is mentioned, but there's no mention that he held that position in Philadelphia. That's an omission of a relevant fact. I will search for a reliable source that verifies this fact before adding the statement and the source.
  • The discussion of the Attorney General election states, "Wharton claimed to be the more experienced of the two candidates." The use of the word "claim" is suspect, because "believed," "stated," or even "argued" are more appropriate. As well, even when "claimed" is changed, this statement omits facts relevant to the statement, such as how many years each man has been a lawyer. I find these combined issues especially troublesome because Wharton did have more years practicing as a lawyer. That is simply a fact. The quality of each man's experience is another issue, but the quantity is easily measured. I am changing the word "claimed" to "argued." I will then search for a reliable source that states the years each man has practiced law and add a statement of those facts and the source.
  • The paragraph that mentions Biden's two "noteworthy" acts since being elected is also dubious. I personally agree that the appointments were notable and positive, but the facts should speak for themselves. Also, there is no mention of important but negative or controversial acts or issues of Biden's tenure. If there are none, fine. But if something negative or controversial has happened during his tenure, it needs to be included. I am removing the word "noteworthy" and will research whether there are any negative or controversial occurrences during Biden's tenure. If I find any, I will include them with proper sourcing.

Finally, the sentence regarding who ran his campaign is irrelevant and uninteresting. I am removing it. @grog_beta (talk) 20:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Response - I still have very serious doubts about the validity of such content. Failing bar exams early in careers is very common, even amongst very successful lawyers. Wikipedia biographies generally include major details of the topics lives with an emphasis on their major accomplishments. I just don't think earlier exam struggles is a major part of anyone's life. It's like putting previous chemistry failings into the article of insulin co-discoverer Frederick Banting. I'm also I little bothered that the user attempting to keep this bar exam info had, at the time of posting the above comments, only made edits on two other topics outside this one for a total of 10 edits, yet demonstrates an acute knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I'm not saying they're a sock of somebody who might have already demonstrated POV motivations, but it does raise an eyebrow. As of now, I won't remove the content from the article (someone else might), but the article might warrant a possible bias tag. --Oakshade (talk) 00:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Oakshade: I fully appreciate your concern, but this guy isn't just a lawyer, he's now a state Attorney General. I think it's relevant. It's widely known that Einstein once failed a math course and that Michael Jordan was once cut in tryouts for high school basketball. Both example are noteworthy for the contrast and interest they provide.
Further, Wikipedia biographies do not place "emphasis on [the subject's] major accomplishments," they necessarily also include failures, embroilments, controversies, etc. In short, they attempt to capture a well-rounded snapshot of a human. Any biography with no blemish is either bogus and biased or isn't well know enough to warrant inclusion in Wikipedia.
Finally, I resent your insinuation that I may be a sock puppet simply because I'm informed. I think that's rather rude of you. Instead of diving in and editing, I've used my time to learn how to edit properly. Even still, it took me several hours to post the above in order to fully research the issues involved. In fact, I started out with only one or two issues with the article, but uncovered more in my research. Prior to my recent edits, this article read like campaign literature. I expect to be judged on the quality of my edits, not on volume. @grog_beta (talk) 05:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Response - @grog_beta, No need to feel resentful. We're just not used to a new user being so quickly accustomed to Wikipedia standards and guidelines. Like I said, I'm not saying you are a sock, but I think any regular user would have the same concerns. If you truly are a new user, nice going on your quick learn of Wikipedia:Manual of Style and other standards.
I'm glad you mentioned Einstein and Jordan. The Albert Einstein article makes no mention of the failing of the math test and the Micheal Jordan article only mentions not making his high school basketball team in his freshman year because he was too short to qualify, not because of his ability. Both those article though do emphasize their major accomplishments and go into detail with them.
But the problem with including this failing bar exam info is it's currently too dominant in this article. As you say, he's State Attorney General. Certainly there is much more to his professional life than passing the bar exam on his 4th try. How about his positions on criminal matters? What initiatives has he started since taking office? Any new law proposals? Are there particular aspects of government law and law enforcement that he's put particular attention to? I truly believe there are much more encyclopedic topics than failing the bar exam 3 times. As I say in many politicians articles, there seems to be too much emphasis on elections and political posturing... and frequently mud-slinging... and not enough on what they actually do while in office. Sure we need sources for anything controversial or that can be interpreted as bias, but as he's a statewide elected official, I'm sure they're easy to come by. --Oakshade (talk) 06:36, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Oakshade, I agree that the bar exam issue is too prominent in the article right now, but that doesn't mean it should be removed. The problem is he was only recently elected, so there isn't much more to write yet. As far as I know, that is; like I said in my first comment, I'm going to research his activities further to do a more complete and balanced job on this article. I can't say I follow him. From what I understand, he may not even be around much—he is on the campaign trail with his father.
The Einstein and Jordan articles are necessarily filled with accomplishments, but Beau Biden is no Einstein or Jordan, at least not yet. He's only just begun his political career, so there isn't much else yet to write about. The article on Stalin emphasizes his major 'accomplishments,' infamous though they may be. That's not at all to suggest Biden is similar to Stalin; my point is that biographies aren't always dominated by positive facts. They should be comprised of facts, and whether those facts are predominantly positive or negative is not related to editing or composition. The facts are what they are, and the messengers shouldn't be blamed.
I still think the number of attempts is a relevant, interesting, and informative fact. Even if (or maybe especially if) he goes on to be President, this fact should remain. I know not all lawyers—even very good ones—pass the bar the first time, but four attempts is a lot, especially for the Attorney General. In fact, it wasn't long ago that Delaware only allowed three attempts, and if you didn't pass after three tries you were out of luck. @grog_beta (talk) 07:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • My goodness...I've tried to strike the right encyclopediac tone with this revision. I've probably missed a few points and would welcome other improvements. Not too many changes, and virtually all facts are coming from the AG's web site. stilltim (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)