This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Linda Greenhouse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't the article make it crystal clear that she is not a lawyer? And that her opinions merely reflect her ideological bias?
I'm not sure how notable this journalism conference in Aug. 2007 is. It seems like a minor kerfluffle at best. ... In the meantime, it was not very understandable from the text, so I added a little more detail so one can at least understand what happened. But I'm happy to have it deleted altogether. Thoughts? -- lquilter 03:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Does info about her husband add anything useful to the article? Does this violate any wikipolicies on biographies of living persons? I removed the text about her husband as it does not seem to fit, but am willing to re-insert. — G716 < T· C> 23:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I put back in some notable and verifiable information on the controversy over Greenhouse's vigorous expression of her personal views including on court issues she covers. I understand the concern that this section (including the Harvard speech is now too big) so maybe the Harvard speech shouldn't be it's own section and should be merged? But I think this information is important as it was a very big story. I certainly wouldn't object to adding positive criticisms that are sourced or more information on other aspects of Greehouse's career. ( Wallamoose ( talk) 17:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)) Also, I would support cutting down her quote to the parts I think are relevant and not already covered: "It was clear the extent to which our government had turned its energy and attention away from upholding the rule of law and toward creating law-free zones at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, Haditha, and other places around the world." The rest is already covered. And I wouldn't object to taking out the Simon and Garfunkel bit, but if it adds something that's fine. Isn't there already something in there aboue her being a "child of the 60s"? Maybe not.( Wallamoose ( talk) 17:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC))
Shouldn't there be some material here, at least an acknowledgement, of Greenhousee' recent book on the abortion controversy prior to Roe v. Wade? -- Christofurio ( talk) 13:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
The criticism section has undue weight relative to the rest of the article, and seems to cherry-pick comments for its description of each incident. I've already gone and removed two one instance where what someone said was taken out of context. It'd be a good idea to do a comprehensive review to make sure the coverage is balanced.
wctaiwan (
talk)
19:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Linda Greenhouse. 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) 14:29, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Linda Greenhouse. 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) 04:26, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Linda Greenhouse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shouldn't the article make it crystal clear that she is not a lawyer? And that her opinions merely reflect her ideological bias?
I'm not sure how notable this journalism conference in Aug. 2007 is. It seems like a minor kerfluffle at best. ... In the meantime, it was not very understandable from the text, so I added a little more detail so one can at least understand what happened. But I'm happy to have it deleted altogether. Thoughts? -- lquilter 03:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Does info about her husband add anything useful to the article? Does this violate any wikipolicies on biographies of living persons? I removed the text about her husband as it does not seem to fit, but am willing to re-insert. — G716 < T· C> 23:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I put back in some notable and verifiable information on the controversy over Greenhouse's vigorous expression of her personal views including on court issues she covers. I understand the concern that this section (including the Harvard speech is now too big) so maybe the Harvard speech shouldn't be it's own section and should be merged? But I think this information is important as it was a very big story. I certainly wouldn't object to adding positive criticisms that are sourced or more information on other aspects of Greehouse's career. ( Wallamoose ( talk) 17:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)) Also, I would support cutting down her quote to the parts I think are relevant and not already covered: "It was clear the extent to which our government had turned its energy and attention away from upholding the rule of law and toward creating law-free zones at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, Haditha, and other places around the world." The rest is already covered. And I wouldn't object to taking out the Simon and Garfunkel bit, but if it adds something that's fine. Isn't there already something in there aboue her being a "child of the 60s"? Maybe not.( Wallamoose ( talk) 17:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC))
Shouldn't there be some material here, at least an acknowledgement, of Greenhousee' recent book on the abortion controversy prior to Roe v. Wade? -- Christofurio ( talk) 13:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
The criticism section has undue weight relative to the rest of the article, and seems to cherry-pick comments for its description of each incident. I've already gone and removed two one instance where what someone said was taken out of context. It'd be a good idea to do a comprehensive review to make sure the coverage is balanced.
wctaiwan (
talk)
19:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Linda Greenhouse. 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) 14:29, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Linda Greenhouse. 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) 04:26, 1 January 2018 (UTC)