Talk:President-elect of the United States

Disclaimer

While I don't doubt the election was genuine, given the fact that Trump has not conceded it might not be wise to declare Biden President Elect until the Electoral College meets in a month. Thus, I feel as if we should try and make it more clear that the office is not truly his for another month. In previous elections by the time the EC met the losing candidate had already conceded, whereas this time Trump might try and influence electors to go faithless and vote for him enough for a Trump victory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by APenInSpace (talk • contribs) 03:09, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I see the recently added language of is considered by most American media outlets... and by most media outlets... his victory is yet to be officially confirmed as a fair compromise. It is both accurate and acknowledges that the president-elect is not an objective fact at this point. Fizzbuzz306 (talk) 01:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Good grief - I certainly don't. What happened to this page? There's no doubt about the outcome of the election. The right-wing media is calling Biden the President-elect, as are former Republican presidents. Just because one fool in the White House has their head stuck in the clouds doesn't mean we should be rewriting Wikipedia to use use terms not in common usage, simply to keep some extreme right-wingers happy! Nfitz (talk) 02:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

You saw the discussion in the talk page, saw that I specifically noted the wording and you removed it anyways? You should self-revert. Fizzbuzz306 (talk) 02:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

As per the discussion itself - this is not to "keep some extreme right-wingers happy". This is to improve the quality of the page. As "president-elect" as not an objective term, attribution is warranted. Fizzbuzz306 (talk) 02:59, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I find this tirade off the rails and offensive to the tolerant language expected at Wikipedia. "Fool in the White House..." is inappropriate here, or anywhere on Wikipedia. Let's keep in cordial and non-toxic, so that all may feel welcome to participate. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 22:19, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

And we reflect the WP:WEIGHT of reliable sources.—Bagumba (talk) 01:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Fizzbuzz306. There is no exact definition either way. No one here is trying to appease ‘extreme right-wingers’. This election is clearly being contested by a relevant party to the contest. The ostensible president-elect is Joe Biden, but what harm is there in waiting until the election is certified? Wikipedia is not a news source; we have no reason to be the first to report on something. We do, however, have an obligation to remain neutral and not let our personal opinions leach into the writing. Wikipedia reports on and provides information on the political process; it does not participate in it.

The fact remains that the opponent of Joe Biden is contesting the election. It is irrelevant how substantial his allegations are. We report his allegations, and they are relevant to this article. We can equally report the responses to his allegations. We, however, do not conduct original research. In saying this, I mean that we have a reasonable obligation to mention that Donald Trump and his campaign contest the results; the media (regardless of being ‘right-wing’ or not) report Joe Biden as president-elect. And we can add legitimate and reliable sources detailing Trump’s allegations, and those sources may contain more information about the allegations that we can use. Mobeelex (talk) 02:22, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

If we are to report the allegations I propose a subsection of the article specifically about the 2020 election. WulfNorth (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

There are plenty of other articles about the 2020 election, so if we're going this route, it should just be a link to one of these articles. The big question is whether it's appropriate for Wikipedia to become part of the media that is proclaiming Biden the president-elect, thereby subverting the role of the court system in making judgements on challenges to the results. Pkeets (talk) 02:22, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Biden photo and etc.

If I might point this out, adding Biden's photo and calling him "president-elect" in the lede is contrary to what the article says. The title is only informal and therefore inaccurate until after the electoral votes are cast. The error makes it look like Wikipedia doesn't read its own articles. Could someone fix it, please? Pkeets (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

It's an informal title. So it's determined by the WP:WEIGHT of sources. How is applying an informal title any more "accurate" after the electoral votes, when there is no official criteria on when to apply it?—Bagumba (talk) 04:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

You might read further down in the article where it describes the process of becoming the "president-elect." Adding Harris's photo is a bit hasty, too. Pkeets (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

A secondary source says that is not explicit: Although the legislative history of the Twentieth Amendment suggests that the electoral college winner is ‘President elect’ the moment the eIectoral college votes are cast, and before they are counted in Congress, the text of the Amendment fails to say this explicitly.[1]—Bagumba (talk) 04:43, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Quote from the article "Both reports make clear that becoming president-elect is contingent upon winning a majority of the electoral votes cast." You need to fix one or the other. Pkeets (talk) 04:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Haha. Really funny. Vandalize the article because it doesn't say what you want it to say? Good one. Pkeets (talk) 05:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

It was unsourced and WP:EDITORIALIZING. See WP:NOTVAND. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 05:43, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

The title is only informal and therefore inaccurate until after the electoral votes are cast is a self-contradictory statement. If the title is only informal then insisting that unless certain criteria are met it is "inaccurate" is wrong. Moreover, there's literally no reason not to call Biden president-elect: this time four years ago the article called Trump president-elect even though he had lost the popular vote by almost as much as he lost it this time, and so in that case his technically being president-elect was purely based on the electoral college system; this time, the electoral college result is set to be the same as the popular vote, so there should be no controversy over how much emphasis the article places on the electoral college. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 15:51, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

This page on Wiki, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President-elect_of_the_United_States, contains false information and yet there is no ability to edit or post a warning. Why is that? The President-Elect is not chosen by the media and the 2020 election for the President of the United States has not been finally decided by the established process. Recounts and legal challenges are underway. At the very least, this page's pronouncements are premature. At most, they are deceiving the American public. It makes Wiki look bad. Who will trust Wiki if these pronouncements are proven wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRWAuthor (talk • contribs) 14:13, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

MRWAuthor Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, not necessarily what is official or legal. Almost all reliable sources(and now even some GOP Senators) are calling Biden the president-elect, so we do as well. You are free to believe as you wish, but if you disagree with what they say, you will need to take that up with them. Very few people think Trump's legal challenges have any chance at success- and reliable sources can do math and figure out who officially will get the most votes before the formalities take place. 331dot (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

After the formal voting of the Electoral College it would probably be easy to form a very large consensus around the decision to name the president-elect in the article. Wikipedia should strive to be trusted by everybody, so waiting three weeks would likely be less divisive, still correct, and impartial. Not because it may be unclear who won, but because the article itself states "There is no explicit indication in the Constitution when that person actually becomes president-elect." --Bensin (talk) 23:06, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Bensin Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources state, so if you don't want Wikipedia to use the term president-elect, you will need to speak to the media outlets of the US to get them to retract the use of the term. 331dot (talk) 23:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

"Wikipedia should strive to be trusted by everybody": Yes, we operate on consensus.—Bagumba (talk) 23:30, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks for you reply! Yes, we use reliable sources. I just wish more media outlets read Wikipedia to get the facts correct and not use such a critically important term when it is so contended whether or not is is applicable. Operating on consensus is not the same as striving towards being trusted by everybody. But it is a good procedure for decision making that may contribute to a uniformly distributed trust. --Bensin (talk) 21:39, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Some readers may not want the facts and therefore not trust the content. We'll have to live with that. Consensus can have it's limitations, but is probably the only solution for this crowd-sourced site.—Bagumba (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

FAQ relevancy

Seeing as Biden has been U.S. President for 'bout four months, is it alright if we delete the FAQ at the top of this talkpage? GoodDay (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)