Talk:Doug Emhoff/Archive 1

Archive 1

Notability

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.

---

I mistakenly created this page without first seeing past discussion around notability. Fine to delete if others concur. | MK17b | (talk) 22:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose, he is the spouse of the democratic vice presidential nominee. This page is notable enough Yeungkahchun (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeungkahchun, the discussion deletion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douglas Emhoff (2nd nomination), if you want your voice to be heard on the issue. Comments left here will not be noted or taken into consideration. TJRC (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose -- Douglas may become the first Second Gentleman of the United States. While the page has a great amount of room for expansion, it should not be deleted. (Putting this in actual deletion discussion as well.) PickleG13 (talk) 02:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support This article clearly violates WP:INVALIDBIO and WP:SINGLEEVENT U+1F360 (talk) 13:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

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.

If Elected

This paragraph was initially in the lead:

If his wife is elected and inaugurated, Emhoff would become the first Second Gentleman of the United States and the first Jewish spouse to a United States Vice President.

Toyotsu removed as unnecessary speculation and was wondering what others thought. | MK17b | (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I would argue that this has a place in the page for sure. While Emhoff does have a semi-notable career as an attorney, his main qualifier is as the husband of Kamala Harris, and the reason that's key right now is that he may be Second Gentleman. That part should definitely be kept. In regard to the Jewish spouse part, I think that should also remain: Joe Biden will be only the second Catholic president ever, and Emhoff will be the first time a Jew has been in the First or Second Family; religiously, this election has important ramifications. Kamala's selection as VP immediately had her page modified for her historic significance; his should too. PickleG13 (talk) 12:01, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Jewish ancestry

We're coming up on the 3-revert rule with an unregistered Wikipedia user removing, without explanation, the reference to Emhoff being of Jewish ancestry from the "Personal life" section. Why is this being removed? The assertion is well-sourced, not something undiscussed by the subject of the article, and (in my opinion) phrased properly in the article: "Jewish ancestry" rather than implying that religious Judaism is necessarily a thriving component of the subject's life. What is the rationale for removing this fact, located where it is in the article and how it is described? (I certainly agree it doesn't belong in the intro paragraph, but that's not where it's being removed from.) Moncrief (talk) 17:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Edited to add: If you want to mention he's Jewish full stop, I think there's likely truth to that. He likely self-identifies as Jewish. But please change the link so that it supports your assertion. Right now, the citation, from the BBC, says "Jewish ancestry." Also, my understanding of their wedding is that it incorporated Jewish and Hindu elements. Held in a municipal building, it was not a "Jewish wedding." Moncrief (talk) 22:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedians are not in the habit of excluding information that has been disclosed by the subject of an article for purposes such as the one you describe. Being Jewish is of course anodyne, and it's a factual statement about Emhoff that he discusses himself and can readily be found in any biographical article about him online. If anti-Semites use that fact to attack him, that's not really within the scope of Wikipedia to patrol or self-censor. [Note: This comment was in response to a comment that has since been removed.] Moncrief (talk) 06:09, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I just made an edit about his religion before seeing this on the talk page. I added another source to say he's Jewish. There are plenty of articles out there discussing his religion and I don't think it's something we need to consider too private to include. Knope7 (talk) 18:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks for doing that. Moncrief (talk) 19:29, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2020

Because the U.S. Electoral Colleges do not convene until December 14, 2020, any portion of this entry stating that Sen. Kamala Harris is the Vice-President-elect of The United States of America is factually incorrect until at least that date. Likewise, any reference to Doug Emhoff as the impending “Second Spouse” Or “Second Gentleman” are incorrect, as a matter of fact, until at least December 14, 2020. The same assertions would also be incorrect with regard to certification by the U.S. Senate and House on January 6, 2021. No person is the Vice-President-elect of The United States of America until at least that point in time when the elections are so certified, or not certified, on January 6, 2021. This Wikipedia entry needs Substantial reorganization and editing to reflect the as-yet unrealized results of the 2020 general election.

REFERENCE: The XII Amendment to “The Constitution of the United States of America, As Amended“ 2601:548:C281:F220:CD5C:7A67:C17:8292 (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2020 (UTC) 2601:548:C281:F220:CD5C:7A67:C17:8292 (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

The election that actually matter in practice happened, and multiple reputable news sources have called the election results. So the winners are the unofficial elects, akin to their status as presumptive nominees prior to the convention. As long as this nuance is laid out I think it's fine. 2606:6000:60CC:C900:2572:639D:28D0:1EA5 (talk) 07:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: reliable sources refer to them as VP-elect/Pres-elect, so that's what Wikipedia states, per WP:V. Please state what you want doing in a specific, "change X to Y" format, providing reliable sources to support the changes you want making. Seagull123 Φ 18:02, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Sources are expressing an opinion right now, as facts don't yet support that Biden is President-elect. Wikipedia needs to wait until all states certify their results to use this title, which is December 8. Pkeets (talk) 22:09, 15 November 2020 (UTC).

They are reliable media sources and they're basing their conclusion on the election day results that have now crystallized - not on certification or Electoral College votes or congressional counting of those votes. The election results are what decide it in practice. By your reasoning Mark Kelly or any other winner would not get the senator-elect status either. Let the apparent winner stand on the merits of reliable sources, and if somehow the results are changed sue to a recount or something (they won't) the information here can always be updated. 2606:6000:60CC:C900:CC79:B34E:F12C:4ECD (talk) 23:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Holding “Office”?

Is it correct to describe the spouse of an elected official as “in office”? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2D80:ED11:5300:FC90:B8BB:6085:FEB1 (talk) 17:34, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

As defined in many Administrations, the spouses of each the president and vice president hold official offices and are designated members of staff to assist them in carrying out their own agenda[s]. With this being the case, and the ‘official’ title of each spouse being “the Office of the First Lady”, or “the Office of the Second Lady/Second Gentleman” (i.e. Doug Emhoff, the 1st second gentleman of the United States upon assuming office on 20 January 2021), it is appropriate to designate those titles to each respective Wikipedia page of the respective spouse. Per the swift development of the role of White House spouses, their influence in American politics is seen less of a ceremonial precedent and more of a policy-oriented approach to their informal responsibilities. As this progression has taken place, as has the delegation of resources and materials that are appropriate to their offices.

I believe, as editors, it should be our responsibility to uphold and honor this progression of the spouse’s offices and officially recognize them as officeholders alongside the elected officials they are married to(or in legal relation), not only to provide equity in Administrative governance, but to respect the flow and fluidity of the progression of the office in which they hold. DavidMondale (talk) 02:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 November 2020

Change "Second Gentleman" to "Second Spouse" as the link states when you click on it. Second Spouse is what the other page says, so I think it should be the same. Dwaynearussell (talk) 23:34, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: He is not set to become the first Second Spouse, since every spouse of each previous VP would be counted for that. He is set to be the first Second Gentleman, since there has never been a woman VP before. RudolfRed (talk) 00:42, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion about First Lady and Second Gentleman-designate titles in infoboxes of Jill Biden and Doug Emhoff

Please join a discussion here regarding whether the terms "First Lady of the United States Designate" and "Second Gentleman of the United States Designate" should be in the infoboxes of Jill Biden and Doug Emhoff, spouses of the president-elect and vice president-elect, respectively. We need to come to a consensus. Thank you for your participation. cookie monster (2020) 755 21:07, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, as they are officially assuming these roles (offices) like other Administrative officials in the same capacity in the White House. There should be no dispute as to their inclusion in this universal recognition. Additionally, it provides clarity to readers of the article in which they are seeking immediate information as to the status of Dr. Jill Biden and Doug Emhoff’s assumption of responsibilities on 20 January 2021. DavidMondale (talk) 02:59, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

New archives for this page

Hi team - thanks everyone for their eagerness to maintain and improve this article! I have created a new archive for this talk page, you can find the link above. I have taken the liberty of archiving some older conversations and also some that borderline on WP:NOTFORUM, or simply are more conspiratorial ("Biden hasn't won") or borderline questioning his Jewishness, which we've since sorted out. Keep it positive, keep it productive, and thank you everyone for editing Wikipedia! It'll be fun to work on this article given Emhoff's own glass-ceiling breaking (or as a fellow Jew called it "breaking the stained glass ceiling"). Missvain (talk) 17:06, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

According to WP:ETHNICITY, we should try avoiding defining people by their relationships. Being a spouse of someone else does not make one notable. Therefore I suggest some minor editing to the opening paragraph. I would like to hear some clarification if someone could please reply to me on this talk page, thank you. Paul Vaurie (talk) 16:25, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

I'm not seeing your suggestions. You need to be concrete with what you're suggesting, not vague. Please clarify. Moncrief (talk) 03:46, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

His notability is because he's married to Kamala Harris and will be the first "second gentleman" in U.S. history. The community actually deemed him notable at the AfD in August, before Biden/Harris won, that ended "speedy keep". His ethnicity is mentioned. Should it say that he's Jewish? It is also a notable first. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:50, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Sorry I am late on this. But WP:ETHNICITY clearly states that being a spouse of someone else does not make one notable. I am not arguing that this article should be deleted, but that we shouldn't be defining Emhoff by his relationship to Kamala Harris, at least in the opening paragraph. Maybe I'm wrong. This is just my thought. Paul Vaurie (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Paul Vaurie, no worries, we have WP:NODEADLINE here. It does say Generally speaking, notability is not inherited, which means the fact that a person is the spouse of another notable person does not make that person notable. "Generally speaking" seems to be a big caveat to me. How many of the biographies in Category:Spouses of national leaders could stand on their own, without their marital status? Probably most are not notable outside of their spouse. The only way I see to not include Kamala in the opening sentence would be to cut it at "is an American lawyer", and Kamala would be in the second sentence. Or focus the first paragraph on his legal career and make Kamala and Second Gentleman the second paragraph? That seems like burying the lead to me. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: In all truth, I'm sorry I brought up this discussion. Do whatever you feel is best for the article. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:07, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Consensus about title

Please do not add the title of second gentleman of the United States until January 20, 2021 at 17:00 UTC per the consensus here. cookie monster (2020) 755 04:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

The first ever husband of a U.S. vice president, Emhoff is the first second gentleman in American history. - Is this not a tautology? Valetude (talk) 20:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Wait until we get the second second gentleman. Elizium23 (talk) 13:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

New infobox image

• 
  The Image Editor's proposal
• Twitter photo
  Twitter photo

We should change the infobox image to this. It’s higher res, more recent, less cluttered, and it’s a more well crafted portrait, being found on the official White House website. Thoughts? The Image Editor (talk) 00:22, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm in favor of the change for the reasons stated above. Knope7 (talk) 03:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree. No background clutter is a huge plus. Clean and simple. Elizium23 (talk) 13:55, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

New contender. This was taken from Twitter. Unfortunately it is only 400x400. I stand by the decision above. Elizium23 (talk) 19:01, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I support The Image Editor's proposal. Clean background, fairly high resolution, and from the White House. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:19, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2021

In the 'External links' section, typo should be corrected. Change text from "Douglas Emhoff on White House wbesite" to "Douglas Emhoff on White House website". "website" is misspelt. Lemonbear54 (talk) 13:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done Elizium23 (talk) 13:54, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Change title to "Doug Emhoff"?

Per COMMONNAME. I don't think I've seen a single profile or description of Emhoff where he's called Douglas (apart from perhaps the very first reference in formal media like the New York Times, which goes on to call him Doug and has "Doug" in the article title [1]). It seems clear that Doug is the name he goes by in life. Moncrief (talk) 03:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Moncrief , agreed. "Doug" seems to be the most common usage except in very formal situations. I like using "Doug" and adding "Douglas" as a redirect. Don't think we need disambiguation here. MattyMetalFan (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to revisit this again. We should change the title to Doug Emhoff per COMMONNAME. Moncrief (talk) 18:56, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

The White House has gone with Douglas Emhoff. Knope7 (talk) 03:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

is this worth resisting per this recent Politico article: link Epluribusunumyall (talk) 11:49, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

"First Second Gentleman" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect First Second Gentleman. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 31#First Second Gentleman until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Why censoring the "kissing" event?

Hi Muboshgu: Can you explain your revert? Why censorship from an admin in violation of WP policy? There are multiple reports from reliable sources (The Independent, The Telegraph, among others) on this event so it is clearly WP:DUE. The reference to The New York Post is also from these sources. Normchou ^💬 19:42, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Many things get reported on by multiple publications, this does not make them all WP:DUE. I think that moment is quite WP:UNDUE. What purpose does its inclusion serve? What is it getting at? I imagine many publications, especially stronger ones (NYT, WaPo, etc.) didn't bother with it. If other editors disagree with me, so be it. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Some examples of sources (other than The NY Post) are listed below.

I do not think it is reasonable or in line with WP policy to discount all of them by just saying that a specific source did not report on it.

Normchou ^💬 19:57, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

It helps us to assess the weight of things. More concerning to me is I see Tucker Carlson highlighted this on his show last night. I'm old enough to remember Fox News doing the same thing when Joe Biden embraced Michelle Obama and Barack Obama embraced Jill Biden at the 2008 event when Obama announced his VP pick. It's pushing a negative POV on an innocuous moment. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

I think you are confounding "pushing" a negative POV vs. presenting all due POVs, whether positive or negative, in accordance with reliable sources. That is what NPOV is for. I don't think the "smooch of the union" is just "negative"; it's playful and may reflect an atmosphere at the SOTU address, and it is also controversial because of the unusual lip contact. So, this event is NOT Joe Biden embraced Michelle Obama and Barack Obama embraced Jill Biden but actually worth discussion outside of Fox News. The speculation re Tucker Carlson and whatnot is just your personal political opinion, which adds little weight to the argument for censorship. Normchou ^💬 18:17, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

No, I do not think I am confounding anything. I am seeing something insignificant and saying it is UNDUE and questioning what it has to do with anything, if not pushing a negative POV. People kiss on the lips. So what? Wikipedia is WP:NOTEVERYTHING, including a collection of viral moments. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The ultimate test for WP:DUEness is the prevalence of POVs present in RSes, not what you see or think. I trust you as an admin must be experienced enough to recognize that, but you somehow choose to ignore this core policy when it comes to your personal political affiliations/opinions. At any rate, I agree we can leave it at that and let other editors decide. Normchou ^💬 19:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

References

Infobox children

Cole is not notable in his own right (no article here) so he will not be mentioned by name in the infobox. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 23:41, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Neither is Emhoff. This article should be merged with the Kamala Harris article. 2601:647:667F:9C96:A599:9ABC:1BDD:A90 (talk) 02:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Divorce

How did Doug Emhof manage to divorce his 1st wife in 2008, and her entry says she divorced him in 2010? 2003:E9:872F:A236:2D46:6C08:8E5D:2F69 (talk) 18:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, obviously one of them is incorrect. The Marie Claire source in this article states In 1992, he married Kerstin, the cofounder and chief executive of production company Prettybird, with whom he has two kids, Cole and 21-year-old Ella. They divorced after 16 years of marriage. So that would suggest 2008 is the year of divorce. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2024

For clarity you should remove the comma in "actions of the Israeli government, leading to increased hostility and threats against Jewish people", I initially interpreted it as "he (Doug Emhoff himself) caused more hostility towards Jewish people", rather than what was actually meant, "the conflations of Jewish identity with actions of the Israeli government leading to increased hostility and threats against Jewish people." Penguiye (talk) 19:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

 Done I used slightly different wording than your suggestion, but with the same basic result. PianoDan (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Married to Kamala Harris

He is married to Kamala Harris but she is not the 49th Vice president but the 46th Vice president. Mystikfairy61 (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

She is the 49th VPOTUS. According to List of vice presidents of the United States, the 46th VPOTUS was Dick Cheney. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Auschwitz

Auschwitz is former German Nazi concentration camp. Although currently located in Poland IMO it's more sufficient to write foregoing phrase instead of just saying that "Aushwitz is in Poland". Kuba349 (talk) 16:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

@Kuba349 He visited it in 2023 and at this point Auschwitz was in Poland. 2A00:F41:1CCE:A51A:0:61:D36D:8801 (talk) 06:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Affair with nanny leading to pregnancy

Several "reliable sources" are citing a so-called "unreliable source" (The Daily Mail) that reported a married Emhoff impregnating his nanny. Emhoff has admitted to the dalliance, but not yet to the pregnancy. How does this work, when hundreds of reliable sources all cite a partially admitted-to story published in a taboo source? Can we green light this, and cite USA Today??? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:00, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

The affair is already in the article (cited to CNN). Schazjmd (talk) 23:05, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

It was his nanny, and she ended up pregnant. These important points are missing. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Those details appear to be only sourced to the WP:DAILYMAIL at this point. He acknowledged an affair to CNN, that's reliable and where we should leave it for now. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:07, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

But all those "reliable sources" are parroting the taboo tabloid? Might be time to re-examine our definition of "reliable". Magnolia677 (talk) 10:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

There is no such position as 2nd Gentleman (or Lady)

Neither the spouse of the President nor Vice President hold ANY official position in the United States, which, in case you missed the past 250 years, is a CONSTITUTIONAL republic and neither said Constitution nor Congress has ever authorized a functional role for spouses, nor assigned fairy-tale titles to their unofficial non-positions.

In fact, I seem to recall you guys fought a big war to get rid of the monarchy and inherited titles.

Yet, here we are.

WTF? 99.254.68.4 (talk) 06:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, what do you think First Lady of the United States refers to? DarthCloakedGuy (talk) 13:27, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Doug Emhoff

Doug Emhoff is not the first gentleman and Kamala Harris is not the 49th president!!!!!!!! Slcdoe (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

In this article, I can't see where it says that they are? Knitsey (talk) 16:27, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Note the last sentence of the first paragraph of his bio. It states “he is the first Jewish spouse of an American President!” We won’t know THAT election outcome until November 2024! This should be corrected on his bio page; however, his bio cannot be edited! Some sweet kid (talk) 00:39, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, the complete sentence is as follows:

He is also the first Jewish spouse of an American president or vice president.

Nothing needs to be done, the sentence is correct. Shearonink (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Nanny

Why do they say teacher and not nanny? 2601:447:D17E:4040:87A:E3E4:67A1:2E6F (talk) 00:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Because it was a teacher and not a nanny. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

He is not the first Jewish husband of an American President!

His page is protected and cannot be edited to correct that he is not YET the first Jewish spouse of an American President. That is a tad premature. Some sweet kid (talk) 23:15, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

It says He is also the first Jewish spouse of an American president or vice president. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2024

As the first husband of to the first female vice president, Emhoff is the first second gentleman in American federal history. Ferretanto (talk) 20:23, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

 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.

The article already says that in the lede. RudolfRed (talk) 01:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Doug Emhoff’s entry still needs to be corrected!

Doug Emhoff’s page STILL needs to be corrected by Wikipedia (since his page is protected and cannot be revised by registered subscribers)that states he is the first Jewish spouse of an American President! That citation is premature at this point (9-21-2024) and should be revised to read that he is the first Jewish spouse of an American VICE-PRESIDENT (only)! Thank you! Some sweet kid (talk) 23:01, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

It says He is also the first Jewish spouse of an American president or vice president – Muboshgu (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Add Cole

Add Cole Emhoff on Kamala Harris and Doug Emhoff sites Please 188.148.133.221 (talk) 13:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

If she wins, Emhoff will become the first First Gentleman of the United States.

Not necessarily true. The First Lady hasn't always been the spouse of the president. Kamala could decide to have her daughter to be the First Lady. If Hillary Clinton won then Chelsea would have likely been given the title of First Lady as Bill would retain the Mr. President title as a former president. They would have been known as Mr. and Mrs. President. 2A00:23C6:2AB5:6A01:1DF4:2845:47BA:5EE9 (talk) 12:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Net Worth

The article suggests: - This individual has residences in three different cities, all three of which are amongst the most expensive places to live in the United States (the Brentwood house alone was purchased for $1.8M in 2012 - meaning it's worth multiples of that now) - had an M&A transaction wherein his law firm was bought by Maryland's largest law firm - made in excess of $1.2M per year as a lawyer with DLA Piper, one of the world's largest and most respected corporate firms (and the couple stated their combined joint income from all sources was $1.899M in 2018 per disclosure)

And yet his net worth, combined with Kamala Harris, is $5M?

Absolutely absurd. 150.252.242.17 (talk) 20:41, 11 October 2024 (UTC)