The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
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
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.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
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
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
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress 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.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
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.
Christine Schmidt (12 December 2019). "This is how Report for America ended up funding a community Wikipedia editor (!) at a library (!!)". Nieman Lab. Retrieved 14 December 2019. 'We know that Wikipedia is one of the most successful info sources on the planet. We know that if we'd go look at the impeachment hearings article, we know that dozens if not hundreds of people have gone over that and had discussions and make it solid," said John Bracken, the executive director of the Digital Public Library and the former vice president of technology innovation at the Knight Foundation.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Moved as an obvious decision to WP:SPEEDY move now as the second impeachment vote takes place. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC) – Muboshgu (talk) 21:09, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Ribbet32 (talk) 21:28, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nom (Once it gets underway). Likewise for Impeachment of Donald Trump, which is also on the first impeachment process. Xyl 54 (talk) 02:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support; the house is convening at 9:00 EST today to kick off the process (i.e. in half an hour) so it's starting.-Ich(talk) 13:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A no-brainer. --Tataral (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Obviously. --Maxime12346 20:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There has been no second "impeachment inquiry" only a second impeachment. I do not understand why this page was moved. If a move was necessary it should have been to 2019 impeachment inquiry against Donald Trump. "First" implies that there was at least a "second", which is not the case here. The Democrats never had a second inquiry in committees. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 19:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I get the point being made here, and it makes sense, but I wonder if it would be beneficial to keep this at "first" to ensure continuity with the "first" impeachment and reduce confusion. 331dot (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Impeachment inquiry against Joe Biden which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.svg)
