This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Are we quite certain she was his press secretary? Are you not confusing her with Chrystine Lategano-Nicholas? [13:13, 18 September 2004 68.199.73.51]
[ moved here from
User talk:Wasted Time R ]
The citation that I removed in regards to her saying that she attended the University of Pennsylvania seems to be false. I can't seem to dig up the original Times clip of her quote, but the Daily News clip cited makes it clear that they couldn't find evidence of her saying it either, citing the times, citing her. Please let me know if there's a clip around to substantiate this. Also, is there relevance for including this in the footnotes? Thanks.
Icfische 13:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
It's a question of whether she was inflating her educational background. The 2001 NYT story says "Soon after she earned her nursing degree from Pennsylvania State University in 1974". She either told them this, or they got it from somewhere else and she didn't correct it. Not until the 2007 Daily News story is it clarified that "A New York Times profile in 2001 said Judith received a 'nursing degree from Pennsylvania State University in 1974,' which she never corrected until yesterday when The News confirmed she graduated from the St. Luke's School of Nursing. The two-year, hospital-based program in Bethlehem, Pa., was affiliated with Pennsylvania State University in 1974, and some university professors came to the hospital to teach the general education courses, school officials said."
It's not a huge matter — many people do similar kinds of inflation, although it's usually an embarrassment when revealed — which is why I relegated it to a footnote instead of discussing it in the mainline text. Unfortunately Wiki doesn't support footnote references within footnote text, which is why both my attempts to do the footnote ended up being hard to follow. Wasted Time R 15:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
User:72.68.165.124 reads the Vanity Fair article as saying that her actual name is Judi, based on this quote from her father:
She had always been known as "Judi." "Judi is what she was born. I don't think we called her Judith ever," says her father, Donald Stish
This is likely a misreading, and contradicts other sources, such as the Wayne Barrett Rudy! book, page 431, and the Kris Wernowsky, "Giuliani’s wife tabbed liability", The Times Leader article (which alas is no longer online). In fact, it seems more likely that her birth name is Judith, but she was always called Judi by her family and friends, and never Judith; thus her father's surprise when she later adopts Judith. But we would need to see the birth certificate to be absolutely sure (although Barrett is the kind of guy who does dig up birth certificates). Wasted Time R 11:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted some of your changes to my changes. Her legal name is Judi Ann; even her parents have said that in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, which is cited. "She was born Judi," as her father has told the magazine and which is cited in a footnote. Please do not revert changes whose factual substance supercedes previous cited material. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.126.251.62 (talk • contribs).
A recent NYT article says "Mrs. Giuliani, whose original name was Judi Stish, grew up in Hazleton, Pa. ..." Again, though, not clear if this means birth certificate name or name she universally went by. Too bad WP doesn't offer road trip expenses for its editors to find things out! Wasted Time R 03:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Our revolving IP editor, now User:72.80.106.191, claims that "Vanity Fair citation trumps a gossip column in the New York Daily News". In fact, however, the Heidi Evans pieces in the News, while published in the gossip section, are well-reported, while the Bachrach piece in Vanity Fair is full of gossipy unsourced snipes and innuendo. Wasted Time R 13:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
We cannot yet be sure of her date of birth. The Vanity Fair article confirms it was in 1954, and the Heidi Evans "Eager Judi left coal town in dust" New York Daily News article says her marriage on December 8, 1974 was "One week shy of her 20th birthday," but that "one week" may not be an exact measure. So on or about December 15, 1954 is what we have. Wasted Time R 11:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
User:72.68.165.124 objects to the emboldening of her earlier names (Judith Ross and Judith Nathan), and indeed replaces some such occurrences entirely by pronouns such as "she". This is unwise; in standard WP usage, emboldenings are used to represent alternate names for articles, especially when they are the subject of redirects. If you look at the "What links here" for the article, most references are to Judith Nathan, not Judith Giuliani, as the former is the name she was known as in the press from 1999 until very recently. And if Judith Nathan is emboldened, Judith Ross should be too for consistency. Wasted Time R 12:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Please learn how to use repeated references. You keep duplicating the cite to the Vanity Fair article over and over. The cite's already in there, you just need to use <ref name="vf0907"/> to make use of it. Wasted Time R 22:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I do not see why her father's quote about his own daughter's birth name ("She was born Judi. I don't think we ever called her Judith.") is continually disregarded by one Wikipedian. Surely he knows what she was named at birth. Also a gossip-column being used as the citation for her birth date and her name is highly unusual, not to mention foolhardy; an article in Vanity Fair trumps a gossip column. Kitchawan 14:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
User:Kitchawan, you have broken the straight chronology of the article by moving the fundraising activities out of sequence with parts of her relationship with Giuliani. I think this is unwise. There's definite chain of causation here, as the article explained before. And your "Marriage to Giuliani" title is misleading, since there much happened with Giuliani before they got married. I think we should restore the old chronology, and if you are unhappy with the previous "Giuliani and fundraiser" section title, let's come up with a better one. Wasted Time R 14:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
An editor is repeatedly erasing details that provide support to the claim as to secuity details for Judith Giuliani.
For the record, the gutted details follow:
" A neighborhood witness, Lee Degenstein, claimed [in a published December 7, 2007 Daily News report] that the security began at some unspecified time earlier in 2000. His statement placed the security detail as beginning earlier than the previously stated May 2000 date. Furthermore, Degenstein provided details of the security protection: "The windows were all blacked out, it [the car] had several antennas affixed to the trunk and of course had the orange E-ZPass stuck in the front windshield," in reference to the colored toll devices stuck to municipal cars. [1] " Dogru144 ( talk) 19:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
The information expands on previously reported information. The information is more precise that the generalizations in the politico.com article. The information is backed by an identified reference. For the sake of context, what follows is the text from opening of the New York Daily News report of December 7, 2007:
"Mayor's Gal Got Security Earlier than We Knew" -title. "Judith Nathan got taxpayer-funded chauffeur services from the NYPD earlier than previously disclosed --even before her affair with then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani was revealed, witnesses and sources tell the Daily News.
"It went on for months before the affair went public," said Lee Degenstein, 52, a retired Smith Barney vice president who formerly lived at 200 E. 94th St., Nathan's old building.
"It was going on longer than anybody though," added Degenstein, who, along with others in the neighborhood, said they often saw Nathan hopping into unmarked NYPD cars in early 2000 before the affair was revealed that May." [2] Dogru144 ( talk) 19:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
References
I agree wholeheartedly with Dogru and Tvoz that the image is terrible, but it's the only one I could find that WP image rules would allow us to use. What we really need is for some photographically-minded Wikipedian to attend a Giuliani event that Judith is at, and get us a decent picture. Wasted Time R ( talk) 00:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
It looks like this article received a considerable amount of attention in 2007 and in the nearly 3 years since then, very little. Since the end of Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign, there have been fewer than 50 edits here. Looking at this now, I see an almost excruciating level of detail for someone who is not an active member of the political community. I can see where this was done in anticipation that she would be much more public if she became First Lady, but I do not see what good it serves now. It seems to me that she is a "limited purpose" public figure at best. Even this distinction is imperfect because I don't see where she has inserted herself into public debate. I can't quite call her an "involuntary" public figure, but her prominence is due solely to her relationship with Rudy Giuliani. How much about her does this article need to cover? That her older brother died in 2004? That her first marriage's divorce was preceded by a separation? That her parents helped pay her bills? My question really is which details are important to her significance as a public figure. Just because her significance relates to her personal relationship with Giuliani cannot mean that every detail of her life is fair game, just because Page Six or Vanity Fair reported it four years ago. I would propose scaling back some of the details, to preserve the broad outlines of her career and to a lesser extent her marriage history. I may try my hand soon, but I would like to hear from others who had been involved, if they are still watching this page. Stargat ( talk) 13:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have made changes to this page because I feel it lacks a neutral point of view. In several instances, the opposing point of view is not properly mentioned. It should be more balanced. Deuces are wild! ( talk) 22:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC) Vegas949 ( talk)
Hi, I have made changes to this page because I feel some parts are poorly sourced. The New York Post and The New York Daily News are widely considered examples of tabloid journalism. They possess little credibility and often distort the facts. We should try to use only use high-quality sources. User:Vegas949 ( talk) 14:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC) Vegas949 ( talk)
Hi, I have made changes to this page because some parts could be considered gossip and appear sensationalistic. We should strive to only include only information that is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject. We should write conservatively and try to avoid including information that could be deemed more suitable for a tabloid than an encyclopedia. User:Vegas949 ( talk) 14:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC) Vegas949 ( talk)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Judith Giuliani. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Are we quite certain she was his press secretary? Are you not confusing her with Chrystine Lategano-Nicholas? [13:13, 18 September 2004 68.199.73.51]
[ moved here from
User talk:Wasted Time R ]
The citation that I removed in regards to her saying that she attended the University of Pennsylvania seems to be false. I can't seem to dig up the original Times clip of her quote, but the Daily News clip cited makes it clear that they couldn't find evidence of her saying it either, citing the times, citing her. Please let me know if there's a clip around to substantiate this. Also, is there relevance for including this in the footnotes? Thanks.
Icfische 13:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
It's a question of whether she was inflating her educational background. The 2001 NYT story says "Soon after she earned her nursing degree from Pennsylvania State University in 1974". She either told them this, or they got it from somewhere else and she didn't correct it. Not until the 2007 Daily News story is it clarified that "A New York Times profile in 2001 said Judith received a 'nursing degree from Pennsylvania State University in 1974,' which she never corrected until yesterday when The News confirmed she graduated from the St. Luke's School of Nursing. The two-year, hospital-based program in Bethlehem, Pa., was affiliated with Pennsylvania State University in 1974, and some university professors came to the hospital to teach the general education courses, school officials said."
It's not a huge matter — many people do similar kinds of inflation, although it's usually an embarrassment when revealed — which is why I relegated it to a footnote instead of discussing it in the mainline text. Unfortunately Wiki doesn't support footnote references within footnote text, which is why both my attempts to do the footnote ended up being hard to follow. Wasted Time R 15:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
User:72.68.165.124 reads the Vanity Fair article as saying that her actual name is Judi, based on this quote from her father:
She had always been known as "Judi." "Judi is what she was born. I don't think we called her Judith ever," says her father, Donald Stish
This is likely a misreading, and contradicts other sources, such as the Wayne Barrett Rudy! book, page 431, and the Kris Wernowsky, "Giuliani’s wife tabbed liability", The Times Leader article (which alas is no longer online). In fact, it seems more likely that her birth name is Judith, but she was always called Judi by her family and friends, and never Judith; thus her father's surprise when she later adopts Judith. But we would need to see the birth certificate to be absolutely sure (although Barrett is the kind of guy who does dig up birth certificates). Wasted Time R 11:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I have reverted some of your changes to my changes. Her legal name is Judi Ann; even her parents have said that in the latest issue of Vanity Fair, which is cited. "She was born Judi," as her father has told the magazine and which is cited in a footnote. Please do not revert changes whose factual substance supercedes previous cited material. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.126.251.62 (talk • contribs).
A recent NYT article says "Mrs. Giuliani, whose original name was Judi Stish, grew up in Hazleton, Pa. ..." Again, though, not clear if this means birth certificate name or name she universally went by. Too bad WP doesn't offer road trip expenses for its editors to find things out! Wasted Time R 03:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Our revolving IP editor, now User:72.80.106.191, claims that "Vanity Fair citation trumps a gossip column in the New York Daily News". In fact, however, the Heidi Evans pieces in the News, while published in the gossip section, are well-reported, while the Bachrach piece in Vanity Fair is full of gossipy unsourced snipes and innuendo. Wasted Time R 13:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
We cannot yet be sure of her date of birth. The Vanity Fair article confirms it was in 1954, and the Heidi Evans "Eager Judi left coal town in dust" New York Daily News article says her marriage on December 8, 1974 was "One week shy of her 20th birthday," but that "one week" may not be an exact measure. So on or about December 15, 1954 is what we have. Wasted Time R 11:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
User:72.68.165.124 objects to the emboldening of her earlier names (Judith Ross and Judith Nathan), and indeed replaces some such occurrences entirely by pronouns such as "she". This is unwise; in standard WP usage, emboldenings are used to represent alternate names for articles, especially when they are the subject of redirects. If you look at the "What links here" for the article, most references are to Judith Nathan, not Judith Giuliani, as the former is the name she was known as in the press from 1999 until very recently. And if Judith Nathan is emboldened, Judith Ross should be too for consistency. Wasted Time R 12:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Please learn how to use repeated references. You keep duplicating the cite to the Vanity Fair article over and over. The cite's already in there, you just need to use <ref name="vf0907"/> to make use of it. Wasted Time R 22:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I do not see why her father's quote about his own daughter's birth name ("She was born Judi. I don't think we ever called her Judith.") is continually disregarded by one Wikipedian. Surely he knows what she was named at birth. Also a gossip-column being used as the citation for her birth date and her name is highly unusual, not to mention foolhardy; an article in Vanity Fair trumps a gossip column. Kitchawan 14:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
User:Kitchawan, you have broken the straight chronology of the article by moving the fundraising activities out of sequence with parts of her relationship with Giuliani. I think this is unwise. There's definite chain of causation here, as the article explained before. And your "Marriage to Giuliani" title is misleading, since there much happened with Giuliani before they got married. I think we should restore the old chronology, and if you are unhappy with the previous "Giuliani and fundraiser" section title, let's come up with a better one. Wasted Time R 14:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
An editor is repeatedly erasing details that provide support to the claim as to secuity details for Judith Giuliani.
For the record, the gutted details follow:
" A neighborhood witness, Lee Degenstein, claimed [in a published December 7, 2007 Daily News report] that the security began at some unspecified time earlier in 2000. His statement placed the security detail as beginning earlier than the previously stated May 2000 date. Furthermore, Degenstein provided details of the security protection: "The windows were all blacked out, it [the car] had several antennas affixed to the trunk and of course had the orange E-ZPass stuck in the front windshield," in reference to the colored toll devices stuck to municipal cars. [1] " Dogru144 ( talk) 19:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
The information expands on previously reported information. The information is more precise that the generalizations in the politico.com article. The information is backed by an identified reference. For the sake of context, what follows is the text from opening of the New York Daily News report of December 7, 2007:
"Mayor's Gal Got Security Earlier than We Knew" -title. "Judith Nathan got taxpayer-funded chauffeur services from the NYPD earlier than previously disclosed --even before her affair with then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani was revealed, witnesses and sources tell the Daily News.
"It went on for months before the affair went public," said Lee Degenstein, 52, a retired Smith Barney vice president who formerly lived at 200 E. 94th St., Nathan's old building.
"It was going on longer than anybody though," added Degenstein, who, along with others in the neighborhood, said they often saw Nathan hopping into unmarked NYPD cars in early 2000 before the affair was revealed that May." [2] Dogru144 ( talk) 19:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
References
I agree wholeheartedly with Dogru and Tvoz that the image is terrible, but it's the only one I could find that WP image rules would allow us to use. What we really need is for some photographically-minded Wikipedian to attend a Giuliani event that Judith is at, and get us a decent picture. Wasted Time R ( talk) 00:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
It looks like this article received a considerable amount of attention in 2007 and in the nearly 3 years since then, very little. Since the end of Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign, there have been fewer than 50 edits here. Looking at this now, I see an almost excruciating level of detail for someone who is not an active member of the political community. I can see where this was done in anticipation that she would be much more public if she became First Lady, but I do not see what good it serves now. It seems to me that she is a "limited purpose" public figure at best. Even this distinction is imperfect because I don't see where she has inserted herself into public debate. I can't quite call her an "involuntary" public figure, but her prominence is due solely to her relationship with Rudy Giuliani. How much about her does this article need to cover? That her older brother died in 2004? That her first marriage's divorce was preceded by a separation? That her parents helped pay her bills? My question really is which details are important to her significance as a public figure. Just because her significance relates to her personal relationship with Giuliani cannot mean that every detail of her life is fair game, just because Page Six or Vanity Fair reported it four years ago. I would propose scaling back some of the details, to preserve the broad outlines of her career and to a lesser extent her marriage history. I may try my hand soon, but I would like to hear from others who had been involved, if they are still watching this page. Stargat ( talk) 13:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have made changes to this page because I feel it lacks a neutral point of view. In several instances, the opposing point of view is not properly mentioned. It should be more balanced. Deuces are wild! ( talk) 22:10, 10 February 2011 (UTC) Vegas949 ( talk)
Hi, I have made changes to this page because I feel some parts are poorly sourced. The New York Post and The New York Daily News are widely considered examples of tabloid journalism. They possess little credibility and often distort the facts. We should try to use only use high-quality sources. User:Vegas949 ( talk) 14:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC) Vegas949 ( talk)
Hi, I have made changes to this page because some parts could be considered gossip and appear sensationalistic. We should strive to only include only information that is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject. We should write conservatively and try to avoid including information that could be deemed more suitable for a tabloid than an encyclopedia. User:Vegas949 ( talk) 14:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC) Vegas949 ( talk)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Judith Giuliani. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:19, 28 April 2017 (UTC)