Talk:Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory

Before requesting any edits to this protected article, please familiarise yourself with reliable sourcing requirements. Before posting an edit request on this talk page, please read the reliable sourcing and original research policies. These policies require that information in Wikipedia articles be supported by citations from reliable independent sources, and disallow your personal views, observations, interpretations, analyses, or anecdotes from being used. Only content verified by subject experts and other reliable sources may be included, and uncited material may be removed without notice. If your complaint is about an assertion made in the article, check first to see if your proposed change is supported by reliable sources. If it is not, it is highly unlikely that your request will be granted. Checking the archives for previous discussions may provide more information. Requests which do not provide citations from reliable sources, or rely on unreliable sources, may be subject to closure without any other response.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article: You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances) Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Further information Enforcement procedures: Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard. Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. With respect to the WP:1RR restriction: Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as obvious vandalism. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion. Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance. Whenever you are relying on one of these exemptions, you should refer to it in your edit summary and, if applicable, link to the discussion where consensus was clearly established. The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Donald Trump Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Donald Trump, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Donald Trump on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Donald TrumpWikipedia:WikiProject Donald TrumpTemplate:WikiProject Donald TrumpDonald Trump articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Joe Biden Mid‑importance Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory is within the scope of WikiProject Joe Biden, a project dedicated to creating and improving content related to Joe Biden. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Joe BidenWikipedia:WikiProject Joe BidenTemplate:WikiProject Joe BidenJoe Biden articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Ukraine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Skepticism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative Views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Presidents / Government Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance). International relations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 14 September 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Joe Biden–Viktor Shokin–Burisma conspiracy theory. The result of the discussion was not moved.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

It's about time to update this article and those mentioned here (sources below). Lev Parnas has named multiple parties who knowingly peddled Russian lies about Joe Biden: The GOP, Fox News and a few other right-wing media groups, Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Devin Nunes, Pete Sessions, Ron Johnson, John Solomon, and Sean Hannity.

Some sources, with properly formatted refs, ready for use:

• Lev Parnas, ex-Giuliani associate, testified allegations against Bidens are false and 'spread by the Kremlin'^[1]
• Comer Keeps Stepping In It as Impeachment Witness Dishes Dirt on Giuliani^[2]
• Written Statement of Lev Parnas, March 19, 2024^[3]

Political strategist Rachel Bitecofer wrote: "House Republicans knew their source was a Russian asset, the same House Republicans did the same thing during the Ukraine blackmail impeachment where intel told them their info was Russian disinformation but they used it anyway." She described Republicans as "a national security risk".

Pings: Soibangla, Muboshgu, Zaathras, Victorgrigas, KiharaNoukan, Darknipples -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

His testimony was relevant to this page. What do you propose to add? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I now see that Soibangla has already added something good to the Parnas article, and that might be good here. I'll let Soibangla do it. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is that addition to the Lev Parnas article (I have tweaked the ref format and added a wikilink):

At the invitation of committee Democrats, on March 20, 2024, Lev Parnas testified before the House Oversight Committee investigation into the Biden family that was pursuing the impeachment of President Joe Biden. Parnas testified, in part:^[4]

The American people have been lied to, by Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and various cohorts of individuals in government and media positions. They created falsehoods to serve their own interests knowing it would undermine the strength of our nation ... Congressman Pete Sessions, then-Congressman Devin Nunes, Senator Ron Johnson and many others understood they were pushing a false narrative. The same goes for John Solomon, Sean Hannity and media personnel, particularly with Fox News, who used this narrative to manipulate the public ahead of the 2020 elections. Sadly, they are still doing this today as we approach the 2024 elections ... The only information ever pushed on the Bidens and Ukraine has come from one source and one source only: Russia and Russian agents.

This might be good here. I'll install it. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 05:53, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With added references it looks like this:

At the invitation of committee Democrats, on March 20, 2024, Lev Parnas testified before the House Oversight Committee investigation into the Biden family that was pursuing the impeachment of President Joe Biden.^[1][2][3] Parnas testified, in part:^[4]

The American people have been lied to, by Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani and various cohorts of individuals in government and media positions. They created falsehoods to serve their own interests knowing it would undermine the strength of our nation ... Congressman Pete Sessions, then-Congressman Devin Nunes, Senator Ron Johnson and many others understood they were pushing a false narrative. The same goes for John Solomon, Sean Hannity and media personnel, particularly with Fox News, who used this narrative to manipulate the public ahead of the 2020 elections. Sadly, they are still doing this today as we approach the 2024 elections ... The only information ever pushed on the Bidens and Ukraine has come from one source and one source only: Russia and Russian agents.

Valjean (talk) (PING me) 06:13, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I referred a friend of mine who supports Trump to this article. He noted that the first sentence says “false accusations”. He sees this as revealing bias in the article. I think removing the word “false” from the first sentence would reduce any resistance to accepting the rest of the article (which clearly documents that the allegations are false). 98.97.92.82 (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph of any article on Wikipedia is a summary of the sourced content of the remainder of the article. So if the body of the sourced content emphatically says something is false, as supported in reliable sources, then the lead should reflect that. Whether somebody wishes to disbelieve the article isn't Wikipedia's problem. Acroterion (talk) 18:30, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The problem is the political bias. The words "false" and "conspiracy theory", both in the lead, show such bias and should be removed. Fx6893 (talk) 01:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No. Not when RS say it. We document the facts. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 01:18, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No we will not be making changes, as the Wikipedia follows reliable sources. Also, consider widening your friend circle. 01:51, 16 June 2024 (UTC)