This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Susan P. Graber 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 the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/Susan Graber was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot ( talk) 23:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
@ Aboutmovies: @ Fmuzzio: I have this article on my watchlist and I see the two of you have been reverting some changes to the article back and forth. I don't see much substantive difference between the versions to warrant this level of dispute. There is clearly no reason to be reverting the grammatical changes and minor copyedits that were made to the article. Apart from those, could one of you explain the reasons for disputing the other's changes, so I (or anyone else interested) can weigh in?
In response to Aboutmovies' edit summaries, I don't perceive that making a slight edit to a BLP at the request of the article subject constitutes a conflict of interest, where the edit concerns a straightforward factual correction or is otherwise not serious controversial. Moreover, because vandalism is defined as causing intentional damage to the value or integrity of the encyclopedia, I don't believe using that word in connection with this article is necessary or helpful.
Hopefully we'll be able to resolve any concerns both of you have. Regards, Newyorkbrad ( talk) 19:53, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
@ Aboutmovies: @ Fmuzzio: My apologies for the delay in getting back to this. As promised, I've edited the article in a way that should satisfy all the concerns raised. Specifically, I've reinstated all the edits that weren't disputed. Then, with respect to Judge Graber's service as a pro tem. judge and a mediator, I've added that content back in, but as Fmuzzio is correct that this occurred before Judge Graber was a full-time judge, I've put that content in the "legal career" rather than "judicial career" section, and tried to make clear that these were limited assignments during a period in which she was still primarily a practicing attorney. (Frankly, I don't disagree with Fmuzzio that this content could be dispensed with altogether, but since Aboutmovies seems to feel strongly the other way for whatever reason, leaving the content in but addressing the concern about misimpressions it might create strikes me as the best course.)
Hopefully this is now satisfactory to both of you, but if there are any comments or questions, please let me know (here is fine). Apologies again that it took me a bit of time to get to this. Regards, Newyorkbrad ( talk) 20:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Susan P. Graber 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 the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A temporary subpage at User:Polbot/fjc/Susan Graber was automatically created by a perl script, based on this article at the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges. The subpage should either be merged into this article, or moved and disambiguated. Polbot ( talk) 23:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
@ Aboutmovies: @ Fmuzzio: I have this article on my watchlist and I see the two of you have been reverting some changes to the article back and forth. I don't see much substantive difference between the versions to warrant this level of dispute. There is clearly no reason to be reverting the grammatical changes and minor copyedits that were made to the article. Apart from those, could one of you explain the reasons for disputing the other's changes, so I (or anyone else interested) can weigh in?
In response to Aboutmovies' edit summaries, I don't perceive that making a slight edit to a BLP at the request of the article subject constitutes a conflict of interest, where the edit concerns a straightforward factual correction or is otherwise not serious controversial. Moreover, because vandalism is defined as causing intentional damage to the value or integrity of the encyclopedia, I don't believe using that word in connection with this article is necessary or helpful.
Hopefully we'll be able to resolve any concerns both of you have. Regards, Newyorkbrad ( talk) 19:53, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
@ Aboutmovies: @ Fmuzzio: My apologies for the delay in getting back to this. As promised, I've edited the article in a way that should satisfy all the concerns raised. Specifically, I've reinstated all the edits that weren't disputed. Then, with respect to Judge Graber's service as a pro tem. judge and a mediator, I've added that content back in, but as Fmuzzio is correct that this occurred before Judge Graber was a full-time judge, I've put that content in the "legal career" rather than "judicial career" section, and tried to make clear that these were limited assignments during a period in which she was still primarily a practicing attorney. (Frankly, I don't disagree with Fmuzzio that this content could be dispensed with altogether, but since Aboutmovies seems to feel strongly the other way for whatever reason, leaving the content in but addressing the concern about misimpressions it might create strikes me as the best course.)
Hopefully this is now satisfactory to both of you, but if there are any comments or questions, please let me know (here is fine). Apologies again that it took me a bit of time to get to this. Regards, Newyorkbrad ( talk) 20:16, 12 January 2016 (UTC)