Talk:Hunter Biden#Chinese Communist Party

The topic does seem to be quite notable, with its broadness, conflict of interest, rescinding on promises, and bipartisan criticism. Other notable pardons such as Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon and Donald Trump's pardon of January 6th insurrectionists do have their own article. The current length of the topic though isn't too long to not fit in the main article. That being said, more could be added to a new article like a timeline of pardon status (from impossible to being considered) and it being the starting point of Biden's end of term pardons. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^blather 23:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

:The section about the pardon is currently quite short; the section about Burisma is a lot longer, yet no one is talking about splitting that. I suggest that the pardon section should be expanded first and then we can discuss splitting the article. Furthermore, the pardon is still very recent, and it will probably be a while before WP:SECONDARY sources emerge to analyze its historical impact. I would rather wait for scholarly analysis than simply regurgitate what politicians, partisan opinion-page pundits, and cable TV talking heads have said about the pardon. Carguychris (talk) 15:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:I would agree with Carguychris that it isn't sufficient for a split. The tension with the section in this article is that this is the Hunter Biden article, so a lot of detail primarily concerned with Joe Biden such as conflict of interest and rescinding on promises would be off-topic or UNDUE coverage for this page- if anything the existing coverage here already veers a bit off topic to talk about Joe rather than Hunter. The topic itself might be worth a page that covered Joe's actions and decisions in more depth, but I wouldn't support expanding the section here. --Noren (talk) 15:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

::I concur, and I think it's important to draw the fine line and emphasize that this page is about Hunter Biden's actions and things that happened to him (the who and what), and not Joe Biden's actions or the reasoning behind them (the how and why as it relates to the pardon). While a brief summary of the how and why is completely appropriate, a lengthy discussion is WP:UNDUE unless Hunter was directly involved in the decision-making process, and there seems to be little WP:RELIABLE evidence of that. Carguychris (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

:::It seems that the agreement between both of you is that:

:::-the pardon would not merit its own article

:::-but should not be overly expanded in this page because it has to do more with Joe Biden than Hunter.

:::Perhaps if the pardon section merits expansion, it could be done so on a List of people pardoned by Joe Biden article, and then the section on this page would have a Main Page or See Also header to that article. There is currently not such an article, though other presidents do have one. Of course if the topic of Hunter's pardon is proven to be not important in secondary sources given its recency, than such an addition would be moot. ✨ΩmegaMantis✨^blather 21:48, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

::::{{tq|Perhaps if the pardon section merits expansion, it could be done so on a List of people pardoned by Joe Biden article, and then the section on this page would have a Main Page or See Also header to that article.}} I agree with this suggestion. Carguychris (talk) 13:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

::::I explicitly didn't argue either way and haven't come to a conclusion as to whether the pardon merits its own article. I object to the proposed content expansion because it is Joe Biden-centric, but hypothetically content could be added here if sources further detail actions taken by Hunter related to obtaining or in response to the pardon. I agree that a see also link to a page about Joe Biden's pardons might be apropos. --Noren (talk) 19:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

:This is not the pardon of a US president or the pardon of 1,500 people who engaged in the first invasion of the US Capitol building since the War of 1812. No. O3000, Ret. (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Making definitive statements that the allegations against Joe Biden and Hunter Biden are definitely false in the face of what has come out regarding the Biden presidency and the media's compliance in covering it up begs the question that this is something that should be investigated. It may be true that that there was nothing there, but it has not been proven that there was no wrongdoing in this matter. Asking questions is a lm important part of journalism and research. The qualifying word of false should be removed from the article regarding the allegations when there isn't evidence to prove the claim one way or another. It is an allegation. Kanepmk (talk) 17:43, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:It has been investigated. The allegations appear false and it is generally impossible to prove a negative. See burden of proof (philosophy). – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

::Biden's mental acuity was supposedly investigated and we see what happened there. Kanepmk (talk) 10:42, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:::The existence of one conspiracy does not prove another. Carguychris (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Whataboutisms will get you nowhere. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:45, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:After all these years and investigations, no acceptable evidence has been presented to back up the Ukraine allegations. I've seen zero evidence that there has been any media compliance in covering up any crimes. You are welcome to provide such. O3000, Ret. (talk) 18:01, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

::"After all these years and investigations" Well, assuming the investigators were Republicans, they may lack the necessary education and competence to find anything. The Democratic Party tends to attract better-educated members and voters. Dimadick (talk) 08:57, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Typical argument to act like democrats are intellectually superior. With all the evidence of these coverups regarding the Joe Biden, I simply was raising a fair point. The democrats, who you argue are intellectually superior to republicans, falls on deaf ears. Being intellectually superior doesn't equate to being morally superior. In fact, it can have the opposite effect of assuming the intelligence of others makes them incapable of questioning the narrative. Kanepmk (talk) 10:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:We don't do original research (connecting the pardon to Ukraine) around here. We go with what secondary sources state. TarnishedPath^talk 00:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

::If you rely upon secondary sources, then why are Zero sources cited regarding this statement? There may be a link to another article, but I see no sources cited in the entire paragraph. Kanepmk (talk) 10:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:::A link is included to a detailed article [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspiracy_theory] with 123 citations. O3000, Ret. (talk) 10:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

::::False allegations ≠ conspiracy theory. Just saying. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::The false allegations were of a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theory ∈ false allegations. O3000, Ret. (talk) 11:09, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::{{+1}} TarnishedPath^talk 07:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected|Hunter Biden|answered=yes}}

"lying on a federal form when he bought the gun" Is vague and gives the impression of a lesser crime. He actually falsified a FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSE application, where he lied about his drug use in order to purchase a firearm. 64.130.98.82 (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

:"This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected." AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. TarnishedPath^talk 12:01, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

::Oh it's clear enough. So is the fact that numerous legal commentators have been unable to find a single example of this offence being charged in the absence of the gun being used in commission of a crime. Guy (help! - typo?) 13:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Then there was no need for the autopen to pardon him. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:51, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Don't violate WP:NOTFORUM. You know well why pardons were issued to the likes of Hunter Biden, Anthony Fauci, etc. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:18, 31 May 2025 (UTC)