Talk:List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign endorsements/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Inclusion criteria for endorsements

The following criteria are in effect for endorsements on this and similar lists.

There is consensus among participating editors that endorsements from an individual must meet all three of the following criteria for inclusion on a list of endorsements:

1. The endorser must have an article or be unquestionably entitled to one
2. This endorsement must be covered by reliable and independent sources
3. Coverage of the endorsement needs to use the word endorse, or other closely related synonym.

See WP:ENDORSERFC for details. - MrX 🖋 13:22, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

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

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

• MK official.jpeg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Listed only once

Fine to list people only once, I guess, but shouldn't they be listed under the first listed category they qualify for? Like, weird to not mention Kerry as a former senator who endorsed Biden, only for him to appear further down under former secretaries of state. 72.94.1.66 (talk) 14:49, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

They're listed under the highest position they've held. Secretary of State is considered higher than Senator. Nablais (talk) 02:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Use of former

User:Therequiembellishere, I want to keep the article consistent. At some points it says former and others it just has dates. It’s easy enough to put former for everyone or put the dates where they had that position. What are your thoughts? Anyone else have any opinion on this? Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 05:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Former is only used next to a position without dates, otherwise it's redundant overemphasis. That should be consistent throughout the page. Therequiembellishere (talk) 06:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh yes I understand that. But I believe that there should either be the word former or the dates for each person. Instead of having the word “former” for one person and “(start date-end date)” for another, we should be consistent and stick to one format. What do you think about that User:Therequiembellishere Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 07:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

We can't add "former" to thousands of names and jobs, that's an incredible waste of space and bandwidth. We don't have years for everyone's jobs, that why those without years use "former" and those with years use years. The use of these two tracks is entirely uniform throughout the page and it's not necessary to have them all look the same if it's not possible. Casual readers aren't stupid and can infer information on their own without being handheld. Therequiembellishere (talk) 16:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I’m not saying that people wouldn’t understand it, I’m just saying that currently it seems a bit out of place since some have just the years and others have former. What’s a reason we couldn’t get someone’s job years? How would we know that they are former in the first place? Thank you! Wjrz nj forecast (talk) 17:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Gallery

Is their a standard practice on using photos in a list article like this? My sense is that the is just a deluge of photos and think it's unnecessary. My immediate thoughts if not are to establish hard limits on the number of photos (either as a whole article, for each section, and/or for each section in a ratio of number of names listed to photos displayed) and criteria on who definitely does or does not merit display (thinking endorsements that are reference for having a major effect on the campaign, notable surrogates, etc. and not as many endorsers who are seldom or never on the trail--also think campaign staff are sort of a different beast and should be discussed but that's maybe parallel), with room to discuss the middle. The Democratic nominee for POTUS is going to have an overwhelming number of extreme notables endorse. They do not all need to have a photo. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Endorsements for the general election?

Should this be changed to include people who endorsed after everyone dropped out — like Carly Fiorina? Currently it says

This is a list of notable individuals and organizations who have voiced their endorsement of Joe Biden's campaign for the Democratic Party's nomination for the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

which excludes those.

DemonDays64 (talk) 18:00, 25 June 2020 (UTC) (please ping on reply)

Republican category and business/other categories

Carly Fiorina is being put on the business category as opposed to the Republican category. I feel that all of the Republicans should be put under the Republican category as opposed to other categories. If not, the Republican category should be abolished and everyone could just find their spots in the other categories. Any other thoughts? This applies to others such as Jeff Flake as well. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:57, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Just get rid of that category and move its inhabitants to other sections, it makes no senses to group all those people together anyway. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:48, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Anyone else have an opinion before I delete it? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:03, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

For such a radical change (eliminating an identification of people as current or former Republicans), this was done in a very hasty fashion, and without that many people weighing in. I for one, would have rather seen the Republican category retained. I am not going to restore it, but would be interested in seeing more people expressing an opinion here. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: I don't have an opinion on this, but getting one person to agree with you is not a consensus. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

ThatMontrealIP, I agree. I would like to see more people weigh in on this too. However, the Republican category was confusing. It didn’t list all of the Republicans who supported him. For this reason, I deleted it immediately as not to confuse readers. However, I would like to see what other people have to say. To have a GOP category, it needs to either have all Republicans or not exist. It can’t be in the middle (without explanation. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 08:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: All or nothing (your argument) is contrary to what Wikipedia is, which is a cumulative effort to provide complete, verified information. To take your position to an illogical extreme, any Wikipedia list should not have subsections if the subsections are not comprehensive. I would like to hear from other editors on this question. David notMD (talk) 13:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer: please learn how to indent your replies. Examine the use of colons in the above replies to see how.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 14:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, I am not saying that there are only two options. However, if there is going to be a section for Republicans, they should all be there. If there is another suggestion, I am open to it. It was very confusing to the reader before. It didn’t appear that Carly Fiorina was on there but she was in a different section. I have no clue what the whole subsection things mean. I only want to get rid of the one or make it more inclusive. If like to hear your opinion too. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Anyone else want to weigh in? Everyone was mad that I made this edit but nobody really wants to discuss it. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I think a separate article of the Republican endorsers would be ideal, in addition to their inclusion here. Onetwothreeip (talk) 07:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

That would be a WP:CONTENTFORK. We should not do that. Devonian Wombat (talk) 09:19, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Previously endorsed)

Is this tag absolutely necessary at this point? Perhaps a note section can be done up if it's vital to keep, but I feel having (Previously endorsed X) is fairly space consuming. Rusted AutoParts 01:47, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@Devonian Wombat:, @Lima Bean Farmer: pinging for input. Rusted AutoParts 02:00, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Cinemacriterion: messed up the ping. Rusted AutoParts 02:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts:, I don’t really see a need for it. The other candidates either have their own endorsement page or are on the big page with 2020 democrat endorsements. Especially since some are not sourced. That’s my input, but it personally doesn’t matter to me. I’d be interested in hearing what some admins and people monitoring this page for a long time think. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: Didn't mean to mess it up or cause a problem! Just saw it was there and figured it was suppose to be there. Sorry. Cinemacriterion (talk) 02:54, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Rusted AutoParts: Wait! Do you mean you messed up trying to ping me to put input? Haha sorry, I misread that! My mistake. I didn't mean for that to come across rude or anything. Cinemacriterion (talk) 02:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree! I don't see the need for either. It takes up space, and those specific prior candidates have their own endorsement Wiki pages. Cinemacriterion (talk) 02:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I disagree, they should stay. The provide useful information as to previous endorsements in the Democratic primaries, and this article has no problems with prose size. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:20, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

But @Devonian Wombat:, what do they add to the article? They seem unnecessary as they are not added for all people on the list. Plus then sources would need to be added for each of them and then the sources would need to be checked. I think it’s easier to leave it out and leave it up to the other candidates’ pages to see who endorsed who. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

”We need to find sources” is not a good reason to not have something. We need to find sources for everything said on this article. Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:41, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Well @Devonian Wombat:, that’s actually not what I said. I said that would be a factor to check the sources. The problem is that there are a ton and that it doesn’t add much to the article and it wouldn’t be practical to add every single other endorsement and on top of that add all of the sources. I say that we get rid of them altogether. They can be found on the candidate’s page with sources and everything. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:50, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, if there are sources on other pages than its incredibly practical, after all it only takes about 15 seconds to copy-paste a reference. Devonian Wombat (talk) 05:25, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I’d agree if the person had switched their endorsement prior to their initial candidate choice dropping out. But I don’t see the value in having a tag saying who they initially backed. Like I said I’d be okay if the info was to be kept but in note format, but not as it is now. Rusted AutoParts 06:37, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

I would be fine with a note format, that keeps the information and means that there’s no text to find superfluous. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Question is how it gets implemented for people who picked several candidates before Biden ala Spike Lee. Rusted AutoParts 02:45, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I've gotten it started. Rusted AutoParts 03:19, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Kamala Harris

Why is Kamala Harris still on the list? She is a running mate so it's like she's supporting herself as well. Of course she supports Biden if she accepted the nomination. Pence was removed on the Trump list as well. Sredina (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Well Pence shouldn't have been removed from the Trump list, an endorsement is an endorsement no matter what position you have in the campaign. Devonian Wombat (talk) 07:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree with removing Harris from this list. She is listed in the campaign primary endorsements article (as she should be) but shouldn't be included in this one, given she's on the ticket. Flyedit32 (talk) 10:11, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

JIll Biden's endorsement

Is it relevant to include her? Obviously no wife is gonna to publicly go against her politician husband when he seeks high office. Same with any other close family members. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.14.202.87 (talk) 00:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

If she’s notable and not the candidate herself, then yes, it is relevant. It’s not that obvious, look at the Conways. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Not clear about that, since on the Trump endorsement page, several of his family are listed, but I only see Jill Biden here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.193.59 (talk) 21:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

It depends on if they actually endorsed him. If you have a reliable source saying his son or any other family member endorsed him, feel free to add it. We include and exclude based on Wikipedia:Political endorsements, not their relationship to the candidate. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Photos

User talk:Flyedit32, User talk:PintoBean04 and User talk:Therequiembellishere, please use this page to discuss photos to prevent an edit war over pictures. I am not taking sides, because I really don’t care about photos (if it were up to me, there wouldn’t be any photos in articles like this) but I see a back and forth. Please take advantage (especially if you are new) of the talk page before reverting any further photos. Happy editing y’all! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 21:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with having four Senators. It seems like it fits fine on most monitors. If I'd have to pick two, I'd lean towards using Lieberman because he was on the 2000 ticket and Flake because he is a Republican. Reid's photo is already on the primary endorsement list. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 23:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Richard Spencer

https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/status/1297439514244214784?s=20

should this be included? Kingofthedead (talk) 22:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

No Twitter links. Rusted AutoParts 23:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, that's not an WP:ENDORSEMENT. - MrX 🖋 23:36, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

wtf is this IosifDzhugashvilli (talk) 04:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

IosifDzhugashvilli, what exactly are you asking? This is a talk page with questions and answers. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer, you do know who this mf richard spencer is, right? IosifDzhugashvilli (talk) 04:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

IosifDzhugashvilli, according to Wikipedia’s description he’s “ an American neo-Nazi,antisemitic conspiracy theorist and white supremacist who is known for his activism on behalf of the alt-right movement in 2016 and 2017”. According to Newsweek, he endorsed Biden. According to the Times of Israel, Biden campaign rejected the endorsement. Is that what you’re asking about? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:31, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer, I do know who Richard Spencer is, but thank you for the elaboration. IosifDzhugashvilli (talk) 05:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

UTC)

IosifDzhugashvilli, you’re welcome. I would just like to point out that you seem to be using this talk page to state your personal opinion, which should not be done. You’re more than welcome to state your own opinion on your user page. Using the adjectives above, as well as the article you linked to may also be a living persons violation. Let me know if you have any further questions. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 05:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Should this be added?

Should this [1] be added as an endorsement? Thank you Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 07:48, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Re-addition of Mayor Michael Taylor

Michael Taylor is the mayor of Sterling Heights, MI, the fourth largest city in Michigan. Plus one of the first Republicans to endorse Joe Biden. He was removed due to the lack of a wiki page. Should he get re-added? Please discuss. Tipsyfishing (talk) 15:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Tipsyfishing, I thought there would be more responses by now. Is there a Wikipedia article that talks a lot about him which could be redirected? If there is, I’d support adding him back. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 06:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Notability

Does anyone want to debate the notability of Joanne Rogers or Claudia Conway? I don’t think Joanne is notable at all (personally) but I think Claudia may be. There’s been a lot of back and forth on these two so I just wanted to get the conversation started on the talk page. Thanks! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 18:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Kinda depends on the point of adding either of them. I'd imagine Joanne has more folks that'd... care? Then Claudia. And the Rogers name would be more well known then the daughter of the Conway's. Tipsyfishing (talk) 22:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Really? You might be right but Claudia has been in the news a lot recently as well as both of her parents. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:01, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah. Just because someone is in the news doesn't exactly mean too much, ya know? It's a very unique case with Joanne, since her husband was such an icon in US culture, and still kind of is. I bet most regular folks have no clue who the Conway's really are. Tipsyfishing (talk) 04:33, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I think they're both notable. They are both covered significantly in their redirects. Rogers has been significantly covered in the NYT, LA Times and has appeared in documentaries. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 23:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I would agree to adding them both back. Does anyone else have any opinions on their notability? If there are no objections I think it would be safe to add these back tomorrow. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:30, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Strongly agree with adding them back. QoopyQoopy (talk) 20:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

'No. They do not have articles, they are not notable in their own right and per WP:NTEMP, a flash in the pan coverage on a single does not establish notability. They are not notable people in their own right, only by tangential association with actual notable people and do not belong. This page is literally the biggest article on the entire website, we do not need Claudia Conway, age 15 by Beverly Cleary's ringing endorsement. Therequiembellishere (talk) 15:13, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Therequiembellishere, please come to a new consensus before deletion. We had consensus to add them, so you can’t just say “they’re nobodies” and go against it. I don’t think either of these people follow the guidelines you talked about. As for Rogers, she has been notable enough for a while with everything that she’s done. As for Claudia, she is a social media personality and her comments often get media attention. I think both are not temporarily notable and have enough fame to be on this list. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

And I thought that you discuss here if the topic of this very page is notable. Sigh.

I would delete the page itself, given an RfD. It is a non- encyclopedic list, now the longest aricle. In short, this is what WP should not be.

Refs: https://www.altpress.com/news/wikipedia-longest-article-2020/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:LongPages

Ok, they are worse cases there: Insect_paleobiota_of_Burmese_amber

[update: I read this amber paleobiota contender afterwards. I was wrong. It is more encyclopedic and engaging, with the photos of the critters etc. See below.]

List of Red vs. Blue episodes

...

Sigh again.

Zezen (talk) 11:45, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Zezen, are you suggesting this whole article be deleted? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 14:02, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@ Lima Bean Farmer: Yes, indeed. Of course it would not happen, given the history, so my remark was FYI, to show how I came here. This and similar humongous articles about "support/polls/voices/publications/ of X during the Y election in the Q subdivision of Z" seem next to useless for most Wikipedia readers who are not partisan about politics of X/Q/Z: that is for most of us.

The Insect_paleobiota_of_Burmese_amber from this list seems more interesting, in fact: knowing nothing about its subject matter, I had skimmed a couple of its hard-fact entries there.

See also my related recent comment on Talk of: Talk:Mobile_phone_tracking#Legal_commercial_SIM_based_tracking

giving examples of similar articles missing basic useful info or even modest lists: Mobile_phone_tracking is just one of many, that is.

See also Wikipedia:List_of_encyclopedia_topics and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a newspaper for more context and arguments.

Let us move this discussion to my Talk page or a relevant Wiki forum, if you are interested, as it does not pertain to the article itself now.

Bows from a (partial) wiki deletionist ;)

Zezen (talk) 14:39, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Facebook citations

For pages like Alaska Democratic Party and Arkansas Democratic Party, there are posts on the official Facebook pages (follows WP endorse) with more explicit endorsements. If anyone is familiar with citing Facebook, please add these. Thank you! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 03:50, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Facebook is not a reliable source, so no. IosifDzhugashvilli (talk) 04:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

IosifDzhugashvilli, please see Wikipedia:Political endorsements which states that for organizations, an official social media account can be used as an endorsement. If someone could, please add these. Thank you. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:40, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

@IosifDzhugashvilli: Please see WP:SELFSOURCE, on the same page, right below the section you cite. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

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:

• Alexander Vindman.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Alternative Split Proposal: Organizations v. Individuals

Let's split this into:

Organizations/Federal Office Holders (former & current)/Other Individuals. A three way split should keep it manageable.

A political/non-political split is nearly impossible. What's "non-political" when you're talking about an election?Thalia42 (talk) 06:16, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

That would be seriously unbalanced, there simply aren't very many federal officeholders to list. Politicians/Non-politicians is a much more logical split, because if we are splitting the article why would we be putting Governors seperate from Congresspeople but together with YouTubers? Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:37, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I would support splitting out organisations, as well as splitting out non-political endorsements. Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:11, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:BOLD split to buy time

This may either forestall the inevitable or it may be enough to last through November 3.

What I did:

I moved the entirety of #Organizations to a new page, List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign endorsements from organizations.

I also transcluded some sections and parts of sections into the new page so "common" things don't get out of sync.

Finally, I copied references that are now used on both pages and rescued some missing references from versions of this page from earlier this month.

Why did I split it at all without a firm consensus to make any particular split? "Because WP:PEIS" limit was making templates at the bottom of the page not work.

Why did I split it this way and not by political/non-political? Because it's a clear-cut and easy split to make and to un-make even after both pages are updated with new endorsements.

Feel free to revert as part of any "different way to split" decision. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:39, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Party chairs

What do we think of state party chairs? Would they be notable enough to add without a Wikipedia article? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:04, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

It might be worth saying something like As is typical in Presidential elections,numerous other state and local party officials have publicly endorsed their party's candidate for President. If it is done here, something similar should be done for articles about Trump and other 2002 Presidential candidates backed by political parties that are on the ballot in most or all states. I say "might" for a reason- I'm on the fence on this one, discussion is encouraged.

If a state-level or prominent local-level Republican or other non-Democratic-party high-ranking state or national figure endorses Biden, then yes, that would be worth mentioning even if the endorser does not qualify for a stand-alone article. For example, if a current or recent-until-he-resigned-or-was-kicked-out-of-the-party-for-doing-so Republican State Chair endorsed Biden and that endorsement got at least some press coverage, add it. If a small-town Republican precinct chair endorsed, leave it out unless the endorsement itself got significant non-local coverage - minor or local coverage doesn't warrant inclusion for someone who probably doesn't have a whole lot of non-local influence. As a rule of thumb, (WP:Undue weight), WP:V, and WP:RS apply. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 13:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I’m a little confused about the above comment. I am referring to the fact that not all chairs of state Political parties have articles but since they run (or have ran) a political party in their state, they should be added. This refers to both Democrats and Republicans (we can’t have 1 Republican who doesn’t have an article and leave out 10 Democrats in the same position). Also this only refers to this article. You would need an rfc to have something definite for all endorsement articles. Lastly, I believe they should be added. What are the thoughts of others? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Basically, having a state party chair endorse his party's nominee for President is a case of "the sky is blue." It doesn't serve much purpose to have 50, or more if you count territories and D.C., if the endorsers are not themselves "wiki-Notable." It IS useful to link those who are blue links or who SHOULD be blue-links (see WP:REDLINK) - that is, a page about them would at least be "no consensus" preferably "keep" if it were nominated for deletion - if only someone took the time to write an article about them. Not every state party chair will necessarily have the required "significant coverage" to qualify for a stand-alone article. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:51, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

davidwr, I am once again confused to what you are saying. First, not every party chair has endorsed Biden. Second, I am referring to the former chairs as well including those who are Republicans. Personally, I believe that if they head (or have headed) their state’s political party then they should be notable enough to be added. Do you agree with this? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 23:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I believe that if they head (or have headed) their state’s political party then they should be notable enough to be added. Do you agree with this? I disagree that it should be automatic. I certainly recognize that MOST will be notable, but I'm not willing to say it's a "no brainer" like it would be for a Governor. As for Republicans, I agree, the fact that a Republican at that level endorsed Biden worth mentioning in this article even if the endorser is not "notable" by himself. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:03, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I disagree completely, an endorser wihout a stand-alone article should not be added for any reason unless they clearly pass WP:NPOL or any SNG, and state party chairs have been clearly proven as not doing that automatically. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:05, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

see also

Hey, Lima Bean Farmer, I'm going to object to this. This is an important distinction. These are people appointed by Trump. The article was originally at List of former Trump administration officials who endorsed Joe Biden and another editor came in and inserted every official who had been a member of the Trump administration, most of whom had been appointed by earlier administrations, so less important in my opinion. I understood the confusion so didn't object to those additions, but the original idea is valid. The article I'd been envisioning was for people who had been appointed by Trump and endorsed Biden, which I think is much more important, and of course much smaller. Not sure what you mean by 'poorly laid out', there are only like six of them. —valereee (talk) 20:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

—valereee, I wasn’t trying to make it personal when I said it was poorly laid out. It was not organized like the other one and there weren’t any photos or anything. If there’s only 6, is there need for an article? As for the other article, the time which they served is put on there so if it was before 2017, they were not appointed by Trump. Sorry for getting back so late. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 07:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer, yes, it's the six people appointed by the Trump administration who have endorsed Biden. It's been pretty huge news as each of them have made this decision, and more are expected. And they're some of the most important voices speaking against Trump. The ones who were appointed by Obama aren't anywhere near as compelling. And no, even some 2016 appointees were appointed by Obama and just didn't take office until later. Some were only 'acting' officials because their boss quit and they ended up as the acting until Trump appointed someone. If there are any on that list that were appointed by Trump, they should be added to this list. —valereee (talk) 10:49, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Split or trimming is now urgent - it is "breaking the Wiki"

As of September 19, this article exceeds Wikipedia's template post expansion include size limit.

This is causing templates near the bottom of the page to not render properly.

The easiest fix is to either trim the page or split the page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:51, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay another recent edit brought the page down below the limit. As the page grows, the odds are high that the limit will soon be exceeded. Here is a live list of all articles currently in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:42, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

davidwr, I grouped the state senators which saved some room. Even the states with only one didn’t add anything additional. Maybe you’d like to do the same with the state representatives or even the federal congress (I will not be doing that). Also, I would propose, if others agree, to delete the info for senators other than those with ranking positions. They all are ranking members and whips and what not of a million different caucuses and I don’t think it’s necessary to have the information other than state and ranking position if they have one. Anyone else’s thoughts? Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 02:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

It's a start but it wasn't enough, the {{navbox}} template at the very bottom of the page still is not displaying properly. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I am not experiencing the stated problem. Is it happening for other folks?Tipsyfishing (talk) 03:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

davidwr, at least I did something. Try it with state and federal representatives and you’ll save a ton of room Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 13:20, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

In light of this recent information, I support trimming or splitting. TovarishhUlyanov (talk) 23:34, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Page size

The markup of this page now weighs in at 712,082 bytes - the highest on the project. The page needs splitting, into several parts. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

More importantly, it's exceeding Wikipedia's template post-expansion include size, as discussed above. By the way, I made a 1MB test page with no templates, it also exceeds the PEIS limit even though it has no templates. Interestingly, I had intermittent trouble saving the page. I'm not sure if it was just bad timing or if the page size had something to do with it. It was kind of random. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 14:01, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I know there are template issues; that's why this is a sub-section of that section. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't notice you created a sub-section. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:05, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Having had no response to my suggestion to split the page, I've made a start with List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign state and territorial representative endorsements and List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign U.S. representative endorsements. Each weighs in at over 100Kb. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:02, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Parser profiling data

As of a few minutes ago, this was the parser profiling data. Note the "Post-expand include size" is at the limit and the "Unstrip post-expand size" is getting close. The CPU time and real time are both over 10 seconds.

CPU time usage	10.492 seconds
Real time usage	10.990 seconds
Preprocessor visited node count	62,532/1,000,000
Post-expand include size	2,097,062/2,097,152 bytes
Template argument size	15,775/2,097,152 bytes
Highest expansion depth	15/40
Expensive parser function count	7/500
Unstrip recursion depth	1/20
Unstrip post-expand size	4,873,876/5,000,000 bytes
Lua time usage	4.617/10.000 seconds
Lua memory usage	7.73 MB/50 MB

Just one more reason to split the page. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

endorsements by other candidates?

I am surprised that it's not easy to find a quick list of who each of the other major Democratic candidates endorsed. While they are listed on various lists, usually by other categories -- senator, governor, author, etc.--100.4.144.128 (talk) 11:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

100.4.144.128, that is because they dropped out at different times. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 14:46, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Le sigh

You all know this. We must not use primary, affiliated or self-published sources for endorsements. Wikipedia:Political endorsements says:

1. Lists of endorsements should only include endorsements by notable people.
2. Lists of endorsements should only include endorsements which have been covered by reliable independent sources.
3. Lists of endorsements should only include endorsements which are specifically articulated as "endorsements".

Please replace the current multiple references to blog.4president.com, self-published sources and the like. Any entries which rely solely on self-published sources will be removed. Thank you. Guy (help! - typo?) 09:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

World leaders

User talk:Pennsylvania2, I can see how this may turn into an edit war. Let’s discuss here before any further disruptions. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 02:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Flyedit32, please use the existing talk page discussion to discuss. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 07:06, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

For everyone’s information

Just letting y’all know, there is an rfc at Wikipedia:Political endorsements regarding the addition of endorsements due to independent sourcing. Feel free to comment! Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:02, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Question on if this can be added, according to the RFC

Conan O'Brien officially endorsed Biden on his podcast, but the tricky thing is that even though he personally declared his endorsement aurally, no outside sources, as far as I could tell, picked up the story. Unfortunately, the podcast has no transcript and the description does not mention the endorsement, so the word "endorse" (required by the RFC) is not seen on the page. That said, O'Brien did announce on his Twitter that the episode in question does, in fact, contain his official endorsement, but this is further complicated by the fact that Twitter is not allowed as a source on the RFC. I will go ahead and add his name anyway, but feel free to remove it if it's deemed unacceptable.

Link to podcast episode in question: [2]

His Twitter confirmation: [3] Kingsocarso (talk) 06:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC) Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Lima Bean Farmer, the clue is in no outside sources, as far as I could tell, picked up the story. Wikipedia is not a news aggregator. Reliable, independent, secondary sources are required for any content about living people. We have a few carefully delineated exceptions, but this, by overwhelming consensus, is not one of them. Guy (help! - typo?) 22:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Guy, what? I didn’t add this. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Guy, I see my name there now, not sure why. This was Kingsocarso, not me. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 22:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Citations

Why are there a lot of endorsements without citations? Youhunt (talk) 05:44, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

We lost all citations when someone removed every entry into the page last month. Need to re-add them manually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tipsyfishing (talk • contribs) 02:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Tipsyfishing, add it as <ref name="Title"> before the initial citation and then they can be added as

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tipsyfishing (talk • contribs) 03:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@Tipsyfishing: did you mean to put <nowiki> around <ref name="Title"> and <ref name="Title"/>? I ask because there is a reference at the end of this talk page now. I'll fix that by adding {{reflist-talk}} at the end of this comment. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 14:32, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Negative. It was not me who did it. Tipsyfishing (talk) 22:49, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Post-expansion include size exceeded again, templates not working

Templates at the bottom of the page are breaking again. It may be time to do another split or figure out some other way to reduce the WP:PEIS so templates all work. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 14:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

It does not look like the sources are appearing either. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Folks keep deleting them in massive chunks is the problem, instead of trying to find a better source. Causing more work for all of us in trying to fix it later.

Let's put the state senators into the state rep endorsement page? Tipsyfishing (talk) 01:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay it's working again, for now thanks to the editors who repaired the damage caused by using "wiki-standard" {{cn}} tags instead of the customized work-around needed for this page. I still recommend some type of additional split before this happens again. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:03, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Harry/Markle

Hi all,

I thought I'd bring the discussion here regarding the inclusion of Prince Harry and Megan Markle as endorsements.

I continue to believe that the endorsement inclusion criteria are not all met - as the actual attributed statements do not clearly endorse Biden.

I'm well aware that the majority of us feel that they would like people to vote for Biden, but that isn't what the statement is saying. All the sources available have things like "basically saying, or implying, or indicating" etc - but the inclusion criteria are clear about just how definite it must be that it's an endorsement.

As such, I feel they should be removed. Nosebagbear (talk) 13:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Splitting proposal: now what?

This page is yet again becoming dangerously close to breaking the wiki due to its size. Now how should we split it? I still think it should be political vs. non-political. --Numberguy6 (talk) 00:07, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I disagree. I think there should be a finer line. Let’s do one page of Federal legislators (senators and members of the house) and one page of state legislators (state senators and representatives) Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 04:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I would prefer splits to follow the way the article is divided into sections, since the sections have evolved as a good way to divide up the content. "Political vs. non-political" is rather too fuzzy to be a good criterion. I am generally happy with Lima Bean Farmer's suggestion of splitting of Federal-level and state-level endorsements since the distinction seems clear. I'd prefer all the entries at those two levels to be moved to the new articles, but we would need to think of suitable titles for them. --Mirokado (talk) 23:25, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Here are my proposed names: List of Federal Legislative Officials who endorse the Biden 2020 Campaign and List of State and Territorial Legislative Officials who endorse the Biden 2020 Campaign Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 02:42, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion, it would be the most intuitive to split the article into endorsements from those who hold or have previously held office in a federal, state, or local position, and endorsements from everyone else (activists, entertainers, etc.). Oktayey (talk) 13:18, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add

Add that Jennifer Lawrence is a Republican https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/10/21/trump-election-changed-jennifer-lawrences-republican-views/6004508002/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:301B:2702:AE00:A472:C6AF:E272:ED33 (talk) 00:01, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Done, but former Republican. The link quotes her saying "I was a little Republican." ... "I am proud to say I am a Democrat." --Mirokado (talk) 22:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add Albin Kurti https://exit.al/en/2020/10/16/largest-kosovo-party-calls-on-albanian-americans-to-vote-for-biden/

Done. Already added by someone else. --Mirokado (talk) 22:11, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add Neale Richmond for Ireland http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/18/biden-gets-ireland-why-joe-in-the-oval-office-would-thrill-joe-in-mayo

Not done. As far as I can see we are not adding foreign members of parliament etc, unless they have also held public office. --Mirokado (talk) 22:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add Ulf Kristersson who's swedish https://nyheteridag.se/kristersson-biden-utan-tvekan/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:301B:2702:AE00:C9DE:BB75:5507:E557 (talk) 20:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Not done. According to our article on the source Nyheter Idag, "the trustworthiness of Nyheter Idag was rated 5.01 out of 10 by the 27% of news readers who were aware of the site". Happy to add this if there is a better source. --Mirokado (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add Simon Burns and Alan Duncan from the UK https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/british-conservatives-come-out-for-biden_uk_5f931225c5b63bc74ba655dd

Done. --Mirokado (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add Toomas Hendrik Ilves, former Estonian leader https://maailm.postimees.ee/7077863/ilves-kolmandal-novembril-tuleb-bideni-maalihe

Not done. The link provided reports a prediction, not an endorsement. He is not optimistic about the results for Estonia of a Biden win. --Mirokado (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Add Marina Kaljurand from Estonia https://news.err.ee/1115260/marina-kaljurand-i-m-not-sure-i-would-make-a-good-prime-minister

Wikilinked the suggestions to make further work easier, moved the esp dialog above each request. Mirokado (talk) 22:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Done. --Mirokado (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

request

Add the above foreign leaders and add back the artists

I've answered the previous requests and I think someone has restored the artists you are referring to. --Mirokado (talk) 23:10, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Read source and remove Jagger

Done by Pennsylvania2. --Mirokado (talk) 21:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2020

Add Devin James Stone, known more commonly as LegalEagle, to the Media Personalities section of the article. Here is the source. Mklipka (talk) 20:23, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Not done. His article is in draft, Draft:LegalEagle, recently declined. We can consider him if the article is accepted. --Mirokado (talk) 23:15, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

world leader to add

Add Evo Morales https://www.informador.mx/internacional/Elecciones-USA-2020-Evo-Morales-asegura-que-si-Trump-pierde-el-festejara-20201030-0033.html

Not done. "Evo Morales said in an interview that if Donald Trump loses the elections in the United States against Joe Biden on November 3, he will celebrate." This is not an endorsement of Biden, rather saying he will be glad if Trump is out. --Mirokado (talk) 20:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

please add

Add Evo Morales https://www.informador.mx/internacional/Elecciones-USA-2020-Evo-Morales-asegura-que-si-Trump-pierde-el-festejara-20201030-0033.html

Once again I am adding this. Doesn’t just say he wants Trump to lose but that his celebration would be based on a Biden win. Would agree if he only said he will celebrate a Trump loss but he specifically states his preference of Biden over Trump. I’m sure a lot of people on this list are only endorsing Biden because they want Trump to lose, but that doesn’t mean we don’t add them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.198.218.73 (talk) 02:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for continuing the conversation. The other mention in the article is (original Spanish this time): "Morales ... se mostró tajante, en una entrevista telemática, acerca de la posibilidad de que pierda Trump en los comicios del próximo 3 de noviembre: 'yo festejaré', recalcó." This is even more clearly concentrating on the desirability of a Trump defeat, not considering Biden at all. The rest of the article discusses Bolivian issues. He may have said more in that interview or elsewhere, but this source does not provide that information. I will not add him based on this source, but since you have asked for a second opinion I will leave it to someone else to answer the question. --Mirokado (talk) 23:09, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Mirokado, it says that he wants trump to lose to Biden. I don’t know what his intentions were whether he really liked Biden or really hated trump but it’s an endorsement nonetheless. What you’re missing is the part “Evo Morales dijo en entrevista que si Donald Trump pierde las elecciones en Estados Unidos contra Joe Biden el próximo 3 de noviembre, él festejará.” Which roughly translates to “Evo said that if Trump loses the election to Biden, he would celebrate”. User talk:Pennsylvania2, you also edit this page. What do you think — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:b113:38bf:f48a:9a30:fd79:c1ea (talk) 01:50, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

That is what I quoted in English translation with the first response, but rereading the article I would see the mention of Biden as context added by the publication for the Mexican audience rather than something Morales actually said.

The interview was with EFE and there are many other reports of it. A Google search for Morales "Si pierde Trump, yo festejaré" gives nearly two pages of relevant hits. One example is La Tribuna from the Honduras which does not mention Biden. Some of these link back to the EFE agency article on which their story is based: Evo Morales: "Si pierde Trump, yo festejaré" which does not mention Biden.

In contrast a Google search for Morales respalda a Biden gives no relevant hits (some about Biden with mentions of Morales in the titles of other linked articles). I am reasonably confident that Morales has not yet endorsed Biden, but as with other cases editors are welcome to find a good source which has him actually saying he does.

I've made this a level-3 section so the sections get archived together. To the IP: please sign your posts with ~~~~: this is both for clarity and so the archive bots work correctly. Also, your pings do not work unless you sign the post. --Mirokado (talk) 01:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Ok Mirokado, I’ll sign them. But can you please add Evo? The article says he’d celebrate if Trump lost to Biden. I agree he didn’t specifically say “I endorse Biden” but the articles wording is close enough to an endorsement plus I think it’s pretty clear that he does. Also it seems this page isn’t getting a lot of visitors. How bout you add it and others can see it and comment on it. Also add this link to the former Hungarian leader https://hungarytoday.hu/us-election-hungarian-politicians-trump-biden-orban-gyurcsany/. And put Albin Kurti who’s at the end in the correct order. 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:79D9:6525:6755:B900 (talk) 03:13, 1 November 2020 (UTC) Also when you have the time please add some of the above suggestions or explain why they shouldn’t be added. And add the team joe sings endorsements 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:79D9:6525:6755:B900 (talk) 04:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello again. I've corrected the alphabetical order and added the ref for Ferenc Gyurcsány, thanks for those suggestions.

No I'm afraid I will not add content that I don't think should be added (Evo Morales) but I will leave it to another editor to answer this request.

As far as the musicians are concerned, I will update the earlier section again and ping other recent editors of the page. --Mirokado (talk) 13:28, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Marc Anthony

I don't see the word "endorse" mentioned explicitly, but this is clearly pro-Biden. Add? The Independent The Hill NBC Billboard feminist (talk) | free Thailand 08:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't think the Lincoln Project video qualifies, since that is concentrating on getting rid of Trump, ending with "Vote him out" rather than "Vote for Biden" which they could just as easily have said if they wanted to. The last link you post, from Billboard, refers to a Biden campaign add and that is different. Biden campaign worker Joel Maysonet is quoted: "'One of our advisors called me and said Marc wants to do something with the campaign,' remembers Maysonet. 'Days later, I received the spot recorded in both languages with music he and his team made for this spot specifically.'" Since Anthony asked to contribute and prepared the content this clearly counts as an endorsement. From my point of view, please add Anthony supported by the Billboard reference. --Mirokado (talk) 12:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Added based on the Billboard article. feminist (talk) | free Thailand 19:17, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Scientific American -- The New England Journal of Medicine -- Nature -- The Lancet

According to the main article on the presidential elections 2020 on the German wikipedia several scientific journals for the first time in their history gave endorsements and explained the reasons for doing so being caused by the repeatedly anti-science behaviour of the Trump administration. You find the topic with this link: [[4]]
The reasons for doing so for every of the 4 journals is explained in detail, and for ever entry is backed up by one source or more. And still I find no mentioning for e.g. Scientific American on the whole page. Especially when a whole journal decides on an endorsement; that has a greater impact that one single person with scientific background. What is written reads neutral and is well explained, in my book it should be translated into English and added to the entry. Rava77 (talk) 23:44, 1 November 2020 (UTC) Rava77, wrong page. Look at Biden’s organization endorsements. 2603:301B:2702:AE00:C437:8317:C581:A590 (talk) 23:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
,, On the main page I only found these entries:
"Endorsements Main articles: List of Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign endorsements, List of Joe Biden 2020 presidential campaign endorsements, List of Jo Jorgensen 2020 presidential campaign endorsements, and List of Howie Hawkins 2020 presidential campaign endorsements"
Why are the Biden’s organization endorsements not listed as well when the title is just "endorsements" ? Rava77 (talk) 00:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Rava77, they are. Click on organizations and there will be a link to take you to the page. You can add anything there. Or on the 2020 General election news media endorsements (listed in the see also section). 2603:301B:2702:AE00:C437:8317:C581:A590 (talk) 00:14, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Please let us continue at the below link, I reduced my claim from 4 to 2 to be missing with one ambiguity due its name all explained here:
[[5]] Rava77 (talk) 00:52, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Even More requests

Add Frank Moran (politician) and David R. Mayer (mayors) https://newjerseyglobe.com/presidential-election/sj-biden/ 2603:301B:2702:AE00:C437:8317:C581:A590 (talk) 23:37, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Add Sheila Oliver (Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey), Amy Kennedy (2020 candidate), Tammy Murphy (First Lady of New Jersey), and Teresa Ruiz (politician) (President pro tempore of NJ senate) https://www.insidernj.com/press-release/new-jersey-lieutenant-governor-sheila-oliver-new-jersey-first-lady-tammy-murphy-congresswoman-bonnie-watson-coleman-state-senator-teresa-ruiz-join-biden-president-new-jersey-demo/

thanks @Pennsylvania2:! Do you think you could add the above endorsements from NJ? The mayors clearly say endorse and the one below says they joined “Biden for president” and then phone banked for him which both show they campaigned for him. What do you think? Thanks! 2600:1002:B113:38BF:E4B8:B6B9:7CA6:B9F2 (talk) 20:20, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Also to be added is Marty Walsh (politician), mayor of Boston, who just voted Biden https://berkeleybeacon.com/mayor-marty-walsh-casts-vote-for-biden-harris-in-dorchester/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B113:38BF:E4B8:B6B9:7CA6:B9F2 (talk) 20:41, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Done! Pennsylvania2 (talk) 21:58, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

more requests

Add Joel McHale, Alison Brie, Gillian Jacobs, Danny Pudi, Jim Rash, and Ken Jeong (comedian). https://www.nme.com/news/tv/watch-community-cast-reunite-vote-for-biden-psa-2805709 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:79D9:6525:6755:B900 (talk) 04:40, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Done!

Add Colin Jost https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/saturday-night-live-colin-jost-wedding-ring-donald-trump-weekend-update

@Pennsylvania2:, thanks so much! If you’re not sick of me yet, my next requests would be the ones about, and GOP governor Phil Scott (politician) from Vermont who says he voted for Biden (below). As for above, it states Jost endorsed and the cast members were at an event where they encouraged voting for Biden. Thanks! 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:CC4:D09D:1904:8A6 (talk) 22:05, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2020/11/03/phil-scott-vermonts-gop-governor-says-he-voted-for-joe-biden

Done!

slate magazine

Writers for slate magazine who have a Wikipedia article and endorsed Biden (more to come):

• William Saletan, writer and national correspondent at Slate
• Mike Pesca, radio journalist, host of Slate’s podcast The Gist
• Laura Miller, journalist, critic, Books and Culture columnist at Slate
• Ben Mathis-Lilley, journalist, chief news blogger of Slate's news section Slatest
• Josh Levin, writer, executive editor at Slate
• Joshua Keating, foreign policy analyst, staff writer and author of the World blog at Slate
• Fred Kaplan, author, journalist, writer of the "War Stories" column for Slate
• Jared Hohlt, writer, editor of Slate

https://slate.com/briefing/2020/11/how-slate-staff-votes-2020-election.amp 2603:301B:2702:AE00:41E3:A46D:319E:FAEC (talk) 01:12, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Not done. While this is a good read, as a list of how staff members are voting and in some cases endorsing Biden, it is not an independent secondary source. If you can find an independent source reporting this as significant, we can consider it again. --Mirokado (talk) 02:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Mirokado, it is independent as it’s a survey that this reporter does with their staff. Please add. 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:D501:2B99:B82C:9787 (talk) 06:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, no. The title is "Slate Staffers Reveal How They’re Voting...", the byline is Slate Staff, the work is Slate, this is clearly not independent reporting. "Independent" includes things like an independent publisher and an independent editorial responsibility. --Mirokado (talk) 22:42, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Mirokado “ This is the sixth presidential election in which we’ve asked Slate staffers and contributors to violate the sanctity of the ballot box and reveal whom they’re voting for...” proves the exact opposite. I would agree if it was “we are slate staffers and this is who we're voting for” but it is clearly an independent reporter taking an office poll and publishing the results. Look at the Jo Jorgensen campaign endorsements and you will see a very similar article on Reason magazine staffers. Even though they are the staff of the magazine, this should be considered independent. 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:4DCA:28E1:78B4:EE93 (talk) 00:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

The point about a "reliable independent secondary source" is that it asserts that an independent source thinks that the information in the primary source is significant, which is one of Wikipedia's criteria for adding an endorsement (see WP:ENDORSEMENTS). If, for example, the New York Times reports that 6 Slate staff have endorsed Biden, we can add them using NYT as the supporting reference. If the NYT article links to Slate without listing the names, we can add Slate in the reference as supporting information (look for Citing in the article for examples of that). I don't see what relevance (for Wikipedia) the fact that they have done this before has. If nobody else is reporting it, we cannot add it. --Mirokado (talk) 02:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Mirokado, I think differently, but I’ll accept our differences. Can you please add the members of “Jazz for Biden” and “Team Joe Sings”. They are both members of Biden campaigns. I added the quotes from the articles too. On top of that, “Team Joe Sings” clearly means that those singing are on team joe. Plus, based on the quotes I provided as well as other places in the article, that state that they campaign, support, and/or endorse Biden. Thank you! 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:4DCA:28E1:78B4:EE93 (talk) 03:12, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

I'll have a look at those while I am watching the election coverage. I'd like to take this opportunity to say thank you for your contributions here. It is not always easy to edit as an IP. Have you at least considered creating an account? With that and ten edits elsewhere you could edit this article yourself. --Mirokado (talk) 03:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Mirokado, I have not thought of it. I will probably not edit much after the election. Maybe I’ll reconsider in 2024 or next time I’m interested in editing something. Once again, thank you very much for helping with my additions. Enjoy watching the election coverage, it is very interesting! 2601:8A:4102:B3A0:4DCA:28E1:78B4:EE93 (talk) 03:47, 4 November 2020 (UTC)