Article does not meet requirement 2b. of WP:GA?, sources are reliable but severely outdated, most by a decade or more.
Article does not meet requirement 3b., "article stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail". The article misses the meaning of "Average Joe" and conflates the term with "average American" by including largely irrelevant demographic information about the average American. These terms are not synonyms.
I think it qualifies as "a long way off" from both of those criteria, so I'm quick failing it.
This article should be a definition of the term "Average Joe". As it stands now, the article is cluttered and bloated with demographic information which is mostly irrelevant to the meaning of "Average Joe". (See John Q. Public, Average Joe's direct synonym)
Average Joe is the "man on the street", the "man on the Clapham Omnibus", etc. He is not a mathematical average. The whole point of saying "Average Joe" instead of "the average American" is to elicit the general idea of "averageness", without the mathematical rigor. There are no real, live human beings who perfectly fit the average, the term "Average Joe" and its variants are meant to reflect that fact. — QuintessentialAnomaly [talk] 12/24/2020
