Talk:Amy Coney Barrett

RV judge infobox

@KrakatoaKatie: saw you removed the judge infobox. All ok?Bjhillis (talk) 21:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

@Bjhillis: Thank you for reminding me to post about that here. The article subject contacted the Oversight list about the unsourced public addition of her birthdate. Per WP:BLPPRIVACY, I've suppressed it.

You're fine to add the infobox back if that's supported by consensus, but do not add the birthdate again without multiple reliable sources, and even then we'd ask you respect the subject's wishes and concerns. Thanks. :-) Katie^talk 21:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Understood. No need to include a DOB given request.Bjhillis (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Confused

@KrakatoaKatie:, @Safiel:, @Bjhillis:, @Marquardtika:: Okay, I understand the logic of the suppression, but given that it's part of her public questionnaire (released by the judiciary committee and accessed by the general public); what was the specific objection? So is there not supposed to be an infobox regarding her at all? What about the other sources regarding the announcement of her nomination, why were those entries deleted?

Clarification would be helpful, thanks. Snickers2686 (talk) 06:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

The subject of the article contacted OTRS and requested that the birth date be removed. The questionnaire to which you refer is a primary source, and per WP:DOB we suppressed the information. The issue isn't the infobox – that's a content issue that should be decided here. Katie^talk 11:45, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Ridiculous overkill

It was not necessary to revert back to oversight the birth date. All that had to happen was to remove the birth date and then oversight any revisions that had the birth date in it. Much productive work on this article was destroyed due to the errant manner in which this oversight was conducted. Safiel (talk) 06:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

In any event, I clean up the mess. Safiel (talk) 07:11, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

@Snickers2686: The sole problem was that the full birth date needed to be removed and oversighted. It should not have been done the way it was done, it could have been done with FAR less disruption. In any event, I have restored the infobox, with year of birth only, and have fixed most of the damage that was done by the massive rollback. Safiel (talk) 07:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Same thing happened at Kevin C. Newsom page. To avoid any issue, I removed dob from the 20 or so pages of living persons (judges, lawyers, law professors) I had infoboxed.Bjhillis (talk) 11:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)