Talk:Tammy Duckworth: Difference between revisions
Srich32977 (talk | contribs) Post hatnote re multiple DOB discussions & shorten discussion heading |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
# [[/Archive 2|19 June 2007 – 13 November 2012]] |
# [[/Archive 2|19 June 2007 – 13 November 2012]] |
||
|}<!--Template:Archivebox--> |
|}<!--Template:Archivebox--> |
||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
{{Notice|There have been 6 different discussions/RfCs on the question of including Duckworth's date of birth in the article. In each one the resolution was per [[WP:DOB]] policy to include the year of birth only. Please review these discussions before revisiting this topic.}} |
|||
== Request from Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name |
== Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name== |
||
{{Discussion top |The following request was confirmed as coming from Tammy Duckworth (if necessary, I will forward proof by email to any administrator upon request). The result of the discussion at the [[WP:BLPN |biography of living perons noticeboard]] (archive link is [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive26#Tammy_Duckworth_.28closed.29|here]]) and in keeping with WP policy/guidline, consensus is to remove the ''exact'' date of birth and her mother's maiden name (as requested). Thanks, [[User:R. Baley|R. Baley]] 22:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC) <small>'''For the most recent iteration of this issue, please see the archived biography of living perons noticeboard discussion link [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive160#Tammy_Duckworth|here]]. Essentially, regardless of whether or not the subject of a [[WP:BLP]] is a public figure, Wikipedia's [[WP:DOB|policy on date of birth]] states that if a subject objects to the inclusion of their date of birth, simply list the year of birth instead.''' Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 22:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC) </small> |
{{Discussion top |The following request was confirmed as coming from Tammy Duckworth (if necessary, I will forward proof by email to any administrator upon request). The result of the discussion at the [[WP:BLPN |biography of living perons noticeboard]] (archive link is [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive26#Tammy_Duckworth_.28closed.29|here]]) and in keeping with WP policy/guidline, consensus is to remove the ''exact'' date of birth and her mother's maiden name (as requested). Thanks, [[User:R. Baley|R. Baley]] 22:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC) <small>'''For the most recent iteration of this issue, please see the archived biography of living perons noticeboard discussion link [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive160#Tammy_Duckworth|here]]. Essentially, regardless of whether or not the subject of a [[WP:BLP]] is a public figure, Wikipedia's [[WP:DOB|policy on date of birth]] states that if a subject objects to the inclusion of their date of birth, simply list the year of birth instead.''' Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 22:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC) </small> |
||
}} |
}} |
||
Line 109: | Line 108: | ||
:::::::::::For any editors who come along later and read this thread, you can find the long running history (since 2007) of this issue over the subject's date of birth at the top of this page in the thread [[Talk:Tammy Duckworth#Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name]]. Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 05:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC) |
:::::::::::For any editors who come along later and read this thread, you can find the long running history (since 2007) of this issue over the subject's date of birth at the top of this page in the thread [[Talk:Tammy Duckworth#Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name]]. Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 05:07, 19 December 2012 (UTC) |
||
{{hab}} |
{{hab}} |
||
{{hat| |
{{hat|2013 Discussion of the issue}} |
||
:IMO if the [[Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]] includes the date (when it is updated), then I see no reason why we should not - the date seems to have been provided to other news organizations, so we have [[WP:RS]] to verify it. – [[User:Connormah|Connormah]] ([[User talk:Connormah|talk]]) 03:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC) |
:IMO if the [[Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]] includes the date (when it is updated), then I see no reason why we should not - the date seems to have been provided to other news organizations, so we have [[WP:RS]] to verify it. – [[User:Connormah|Connormah]] ([[User talk:Connormah|talk]]) 03:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
:::Hello, Connormah. The date is readily accessible via internet searching; the reason why we don't include it is because the subject requested it, hence [[WP:DOB]] says we should simply list the year of birth instead. You can find more information on this if you read the linked noticeboard threads above. Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 04:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC) |
:::Hello, Connormah. The date is readily accessible via internet searching; the reason why we don't include it is because the subject requested it, hence [[WP:DOB]] says we should simply list the year of birth instead. You can find more information on this if you read the linked noticeboard threads above. Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 04:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
Line 128: | Line 127: | ||
::Complying with [[WP:BLP]] (specifically, "'' If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth... ...simply list the year.''") is not "censorship". Duckworth's date of birth is readily available on the Internet for anyone who chooses to search for it; other parties are certainly not obligated to render any such courtesies. The fact that there may be links on the article right now to an Italian Wiki article or a congressional guide is not a valid argument for vitiating WP:DOB; on the contrary, it would support their removal. If you think Wikipedia's BLP policy should be changed, there are avenues for that, plus a well thought out RFC may ultimately result in consensus changing. Someone could also make an erstwhile effort to see if the subject can be contacted and asked if they would like to cancel their previous request. Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 05:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC) |
::Complying with [[WP:BLP]] (specifically, "'' If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth... ...simply list the year.''") is not "censorship". Duckworth's date of birth is readily available on the Internet for anyone who chooses to search for it; other parties are certainly not obligated to render any such courtesies. The fact that there may be links on the article right now to an Italian Wiki article or a congressional guide is not a valid argument for vitiating WP:DOB; on the contrary, it would support their removal. If you think Wikipedia's BLP policy should be changed, there are avenues for that, plus a well thought out RFC may ultimately result in consensus changing. Someone could also make an erstwhile effort to see if the subject can be contacted and asked if they would like to cancel their previous request. Regards, [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 05:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
{{hab}} |
{{hab}} |
||
{{ |
{{Discussion bottom}} |
||
⚫ | |||
== RfC on providing full date of birth == |
|||
{{rfc|bio|pol|rfcid=E1FACCD}} |
|||
As Tammy Duckworth has previously requested to have her birthdate excluded from this article, we have complied as per [[WP:DOB]]. This decision is the result of a consensus developed over several years, as documented on [[#Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name]]. |
As Tammy Duckworth has previously requested to have her birthdate excluded from this article, we have complied as per [[WP:DOB]]. This decision is the result of a consensus developed over several years, as documented on [[#Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name]]. |
||
Line 191: | Line 197: | ||
:::*{{ec}}Yes, I should clarify a bit. My point in referring to BLPPrimary is that many here are arguing that since her DOB is listed on her official congressional webpage that it should be fair game. I would suggest that her webpage falls into the category of being both a primary source ''and'' a public record; while there are other sources, the congressional page is specifically excluded from consideration according to our policy. Regardless, the WP:DOB issue still applies. That the information is available elsewhere should not give us latitude to casually throw BLP policy out the window. –[[User:Wine Guy|<span style="color:#B22222;font-family:serif;text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''''Wine Guy'''''</span>]][[User talk:Wine Guy|<span style="color:black;font-family:cursive;font-size:80%">~Talk</span>]] 19:50, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
:::*{{ec}}Yes, I should clarify a bit. My point in referring to BLPPrimary is that many here are arguing that since her DOB is listed on her official congressional webpage that it should be fair game. I would suggest that her webpage falls into the category of being both a primary source ''and'' a public record; while there are other sources, the congressional page is specifically excluded from consideration according to our policy. Regardless, the WP:DOB issue still applies. That the information is available elsewhere should not give us latitude to casually throw BLP policy out the window. –[[User:Wine Guy|<span style="color:#B22222;font-family:serif;text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''''Wine Guy'''''</span>]][[User talk:Wine Guy|<span style="color:black;font-family:cursive;font-size:80%">~Talk</span>]] 19:50, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
*'''Include''' As a Member of Congress, she has no reasonable expectation that this information would be kept private. --[[User:Rogerd|rogerd]] ([[User talk:Rogerd|talk]]) 20:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
*'''Include''' As a Member of Congress, she has no reasonable expectation that this information would be kept private. --[[User:Rogerd|rogerd]] ([[User talk:Rogerd|talk]]) 20:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
{{hab}} |
|||
{{Discussion bottom}} |
|||
⚫ |
Revision as of 01:47, 2 August 2013
![]() | Tammy Duckworth was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 13, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
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 of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() Archives |
---|
Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The following request was confirmed as coming from Tammy Duckworth (if necessary, I will forward proof by email to any administrator upon request). The result of the discussion at the biography of living perons noticeboard (archive link is here) and in keeping with WP policy/guidline, consensus is to remove the exact date of birth and her mother's maiden name (as requested). Thanks, R. Baley 22:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC) For the most recent iteration of this issue, please see the archived biography of living perons noticeboard discussion link here. Essentially, regardless of whether or not the subject of a WP:BLP is a public figure, Wikipedia's policy on date of birth states that if a subject objects to the inclusion of their date of birth, simply list the year of birth instead. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 22:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello. This is Tammy. I am requesting that all editors please leave my birth date and mother's maiden name off the page for protection from identity theft. I truly respect the free nature of this excellent page and know that I am now a public figure (if only a minor one). However, I would be grateful if we did not make it so easy for someone to have access to my personal information that is commonly used to verify identity. Thank you all in advance for your help. cheers, tammy. (IP address removed, R. Baley) 05:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
2007 Discussion of the issue |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
NOTE: This discussion then shifted to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive26#Tammy_Duckworth_.28closed.29. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ybbor (talk • contribs) 02:52, 18 September 2007 (UTC) |
2009 Discussion of the issue |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Back in 2007, Tammy Duckworth requested that her date of birth and mother's maiden name be removed from the article. Much of the debate, especially in the early going, centered around just how prominent a public figure she is and whether she was entitled to special treatment. At the time, Duckworth had recently been appointed Director of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs, and was less than a year removed from a run for Congress that received international attention. It was ultimately decided to accede to her request, and the information remains excluded. At least one person who supported granting the request specifically mentioned revisiting the issue if her profile rose. Since then, Duckworth was mentioned as a possible replacement for Barack Obama in the Senate. In fact, she was supposedly a favourite of Dick Durbin (and possibly Rahm Emanuel) before the Blagojevich arrest. Thereafter, she was mentioned in published reports as a possible Veterans Affairs Secretary and a possible candidate for Rahm Emanuel's House seat. Ultimately, she was appointed Assistant Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Public and Intergovernmental Affairs (she was confirmed April 22). I don't take a position either way, but I think it is time for a second look at this issue. A part of the discussion is above, but the full discussion is at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive26#Tammy Duckworth (closed). -Rrius (talk) 07:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I see no reason to provide her actual day of birth, esp as per her request and the prev resolved dispute about it, but i think mentioning the month might be helpful in being able remove that really weird-looking "(Age 40-41)" desig atop the article, when we know she's 41 (and 1/2 ;-) now. I'm also gonna reword desig for mom & dad, to avoid people (frequently) trying to put in the maiden name (that Tammy requested be removed) Beansandveggies (talk) 09:55, 17 October 2009 (UTC) |
March, 2012 Discussion of the issue |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Why is this still censored? She has been the head of the Illinois DVA and is a candidate for elected office yet again. 72.94.174.90 (talk) 18:10, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Duckworth is a public figure and can not have any expectations that reliably published sources must withhold information like her exact birthday; indeed, it's been published on the Internet in news stories and articles, and that is readily verifiable. Further, everyone here agrees that Wikipedia is not censored. Her exact birth date, however, has not been "censored" for any arbitrary or impermissible reason; quite the contrary, it is based on a policy. That policy contemplates that Wikipedia may include "full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources," but that if a person objects about the inclusion of their date of birth, we are to "err on the side of caution and simply list the year." You can read that policy at WP:DOB. Given the policy, what are your policy-based argument points that lead you to the conclusion that we should overturn the prior consensus? AzureCitizen (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
NOTE: This discussion then shifted to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive160#Tammy_Duckworth. --AzureCitizen (talk) 22:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC) |
November, 2012 Discussion of the issue |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Duckworth is now a duly elected Member of Congress and a representative of the US government; as such she is no longer a private citizen, but a public one, and it is the duty of Wikipedia to inform people about her, including her birth date. In short, if she didn't want her life publicized, she shouldn't have run for election. To summarize, I recommend we update her birth date. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 22:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Redacting my words in this discussion is not very nice. It would appear Wikipedia is all about censorship. Censorship is what you want. Any fool can Google "Tammy Duckworth Brithday". Regardless of what Tammy want's the policy don't cover this and she is a major public figure, a congresswoman and has absolutely no expectation of that type of information to be private. Furthermore, the insistence to censor such information smacks of partisanship by you. 68.57.192.113 (talk)
|
2013 Discussion of the issue |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I'd be willing to start an RfC, but I'm too busy to do it right now. I'll try to address it by the end of the week, if everyone doesn't mind waiting a few more days. Otherwise, someone else can start the RfC.
Personally, I don't think that WP:BLPN would be the appropriate forum for this, since the edit war has somewhat died down. We can agree that WP:DOB requires that the full date of birth be removed, but we can't agree on whether WP:DOB is constrained by other guidelines such as WP:WELLKNOWN and WP:OPENPARA. We are seeking a clear consensus on how to interpret all of these policies in a harmonious way. WP:RFC states that we can do this here (on the talk page) or in a separate page. I'll take a closer look through the policy pages to see where we should discuss this further. If the GA nominator decides to take this to GAR, this issue can also be revisited there. What do you think? Edge3 (talk) 17:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
|
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Tammy Duckworth/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Edge3 (talk · contribs) 02:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I will review this article. Edge3 (talk) 02:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
I have partially reviewed the article against the good article criteria. I will follow-up with a complete review once the preliminary issues are resolved:
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- There are too many quotations in the article, especially in the "Political positions" sections. The "Recognition" section has a boxed quote that has unclear significance. It needs to be cited and further explained, if it is to remain.
- Fixed.
- There are too many quotations in the article, especially in the "Political positions" sections. The "Recognition" section has a boxed quote that has unclear significance. It needs to be cited and further explained, if it is to remain.
- B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- Please reduce or remove the citations in the lead paragraph. (WP:LEADCITE)
- Fixed.
- Please reduce or remove the citations in the lead paragraph. (WP:LEADCITE)
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
Missing citation on first paragraph of "Post-military career". References also are not consistently formatted, especially the dates. Bare URLs in citations 9, 19, 28, 32, and others.This isn't a GA issue, per WP:GACN.
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- Please expand both subsections of "Congressional elections". The 2006 section could use some significant expansion, unless someone can demonstrate that there really isn't much to say about that election. As for 2012, the section is longer, but surely the civil suit isn't the only noteworthy part of the campaign?
- I've expanded both but I feel the 2006 election should be kept short since it has it's own article.
- Please expand both subsections of "Congressional elections". The 2006 section could use some significant expansion, unless someone can demonstrate that there really isn't much to say about that election. As for 2012, the section is longer, but surely the civil suit isn't the only noteworthy part of the campaign?
- B. Focused:
- Perhaps the "Political positions" sections could be merged and condensed.
- I've seriously cut down this section but I feel trying to put it in another section would be irresponsible.
- Perhaps the "Political positions" sections could be merged and condensed.
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Ongoing content dispute about the inclusion of the date of birth. Please resolve this soon. I should point out that WP:OPENPARA says in part: "The opening paragraph should have...dates of birth and death, if known" (emphasis added). I'll look into this policy further, but it seems that including the date of birth might be necessary for this to meet WP:GACR, since the date of birth is known.
- The article's been protected so there'll be no more warring over her DOB.
- Ongoing content dispute about the inclusion of the date of birth. Please resolve this soon. I should point out that WP:OPENPARA says in part: "The opening paragraph should have...dates of birth and death, if known" (emphasis added). I'll look into this policy further, but it seems that including the date of birth might be necessary for this to meet WP:GACR, since the date of birth is known.
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- I'm placing this on hold for now. Edge3 (talk) 03:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
Further comments:
- Early life, education, and military service
- Ref 5 (Slevin) doesn't support the statement: "Because of her father's work with the United Nations and international companies, the family moved around Southeast Asia. Duckworth became fluent in Thai and Indonesian, in addition to English."
- In the statement: "Following in the footsteps of her father and ancestors, who served in the Revolutionary War, World War II, and the Vietnam War..." — Ref 4 doesn't mention that she had an ancestor who fought in the Vietnam War.
- "The explosion 'almost completely destroyed her right arm, breaking it in three places and tearing tissue from the back side of it.'" — Quotation not contained in ref 11.
- Post-military career
- "She worked to develop state programs giving tax credits to employers who hire veterans who served in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Desert Storm; more state grants to service organizations; and backing for below-market mortgages for veterans." — This statement almost copies word-for-word the phrasing used in ref 16. Please rephrase or use a quotation.
- The Recognition paragraph begins with "Duckworth credits Dole..." without mentioning who Dole is until linking to Bob Dole in the third sentence.
- "Duckworth credits Dole for inspiring her to pursue public service while she recuperated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C." — Not supported by ref 22, which only says "Duckworth has cited Dole's experience as an injured veteran-turned-politician as an inspiration for her candidacy."
- "Former Republican Presidential candidate and Senator Bob Dole dedicated his biography One Soldier's Story in part to Duckworth." — First, it's an autobiography, not a biography. Second, perhaps it would be better to cite the book directly?
--Edge3 (talk) 15:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
More comments:
- Congressional elections
- The section for 2006 contains only one citation, which verifies only the final results between Duckworth and Roskam. The rest of the paragraph needs to be cited because there are statistics that need to be verified.
- "Duckworth defeated former Deputy Treasurer of Illinois Raja Krishnamoorthi for the Democratic nomination on March 20, 2012, then faced incumbent Republican Joe Walsh in the general election." — Not supported by ref 30.
- "Duckworth was considered the favorite, as the district had been redrawn to be significantly more Democratic than its predecessor." — Missing citation.
- "On October 11, 2012, during a live debate between the two, Walsh brought up the fact that Duckworth had been named in a civil suit filed by two employees against Patricia Simms, director of the Anna Veterans' Home in southern Illinois." — Refs 18 and 19 seem to be irrelevant.
- "... the first member of Congress born in Thailand." — Doesn't seem to be supported by the source.
- Political positions
- Entire "Veterans affairs" section directly copies text from ref 38
- Perhaps her stance on education isn't noteworthy? It's sourced to her campaign website's press release.
- The first "Iraq War" paragraph implies that the positions Duckworth expressed in her press release were also expressed in her response to Bush's weekly radio address. Please separate the two and clarify the difference.
- I'm not sure whether the quote in the "Iraq War" section is necessary.
- In the "Gun control" section, none of the three citations have working links, and the quotation does not have a reference.
I now conclude this review. Because I have identified close paraphrasing or copyright violations, I fail this article's GA nomination per WP:GAQF.
I have also noticed that edit warring occasionally resumes over the inclusion of Duckworth's DOB. Most recently, an anonymous user re-added the DOB today. This edit cannot be considered vandalism, per WP:VANDAL: "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism." Thus, the article currently fails GA criterion #5, which is also grounds for quick failure.
Even if there is no edit war, I would argue that the GA criteria urges that the full DOB be included, per WP:OPENPARA. (For the path, see GA criterion #1, which requires compliance with WP:LEAD. Go to the WP:LEAD#Biographies section, which in turn points directly to WP:MOSBIO. See WP:MOSBIO#Opening paragraph.) I should note that WP:GACR does not require me to check for compliance with WP:BLP. Because there seems to be a conflict between WP:GACR and WP:DOB, which is further complicated by the existence of WP:WELLKNOWN, this GA nomination cannot proceed without further clarification on how the guidelines and policies should be interpreted when we mix them together.
I recommend asking Tammy Duckworth if we can include her full birthdate on the article, since that would allow us to sidestep this debate entirely. Once all of the other issues I listed above are addressed, I recommend submitting this for renomination or, if you challenge my reasoning, reassessment. --Edge3 (talk) 02:48, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Ancestors vs forefathers
This is a really well written article. Kudos to all who have contributed. It was only when I came to the use of the word ancestors that I felt that not quite the right word (nor the right tense in the subordinate phrase) had been used. Ancestor has the connotation of legal terminology on the one hand, biological descent trees on another, and spiritual and ethnic roots on another. In the context of military prowess and service to one's nation, it seems to me that either forebears or forefathers is the better term. Given that all the said fighting forebears were fathers rather than mothers, forefathers seems to me to be the right word here.124.186.93.5 (talk) 07:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
RfC on providing full date of birth
![]() |
|
As Tammy Duckworth has previously requested to have her birthdate excluded from this article, we have complied as per WP:DOB. This decision is the result of a consensus developed over several years, as documented on #Request from Tammy Duckworth to withhold date of birth and mother's maiden name.
The request may have carried more weight in 2007, when Ms. Duckworth had less notability as an official in the Illinois state government. However, now she serves on the US Congress and has less of an expectation of privacy, as per WP:WELLKNOWN. I am initiating this RfC to request that the community allow this article to display Ms. Duckworth's full date of birth, as per WP:OPENPARA and WP:WELLKNOWN. WP:OPENPARA states that "The opening paragraph should have... dates of birth and death, if known". Since the date of birth is known, the MOS urges us to include it. Furthermore, WP:WELLKNOWN suggests that we should publish information that is "noteworthy, relevant, and well-documented", even if the subject does not want it mentioned.
For reference, the birthdate is published on her official, Congressional bio ([1]). Edge3 (talk) 01:58, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Do not include. I see no good reason to go against her specific wish. It is not vital information and the MOS does not override our responsibility towards living subjects of biographies.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- do not include - have you read the threads above? This issue has been discussed ad naseum. Why does her birthdate matter to you? If she specifically asked to have it removed, in hopes of a little bit of security-through-obscurity, we can certainly do this for her. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 02:44, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- FYI, a newer thread in January 2013 suggested that an RfC may be necessary. Just because the issue has been discussed ad nauseum doesn't mean we can't discuss it now. Edge3 (talk) 03:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Why not include it? As Edge3 noted, it's not that hard to find her birthday, since its published on her official Congressional bio. Canuck89 (chat with me) 03:58, July 24, 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think it's up for debate to say that at this point her full DOB is extremely easier to readily find presently rather than around 6 years ago. I see no reason not to include it at this point as the circumstances have obviously changed from 2007. In addition to the Congressional bio, it is worth mentioning that multiple 2012 election publications also include the full date. – Connormah (talk) 04:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Include. Consensus can change. Widely available information from multiple reliable secondary sources. Published in her own congressional bio, which obviously renders her six year old request moot. Gamaliel (talk) 06:19, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Weak Include - Agree with Edge3 that this subject clearly has become more notable, which suggests it might be more appropriate now than it was previously to include the birth date. At the same time, agree with User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· that there is very little value to readers to know her exact date of birth, and there are legitimate personal privacy concerns as suggested by WP:DOB. All-in-all I think the bottom line is that, for better or worse, it's probably not reasonable for US members of congress to expect that their birth date should not be public knowledge. NickCT (talk) 12:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Do not include per the prior rationales in the archived talk page threads unless the policy issue is resolved. WP:DOB states that if a subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, simply list the year instead. It's obvious from looking at WP:BLP that WP:WELLKNOWN was not intended to trump WP:DOB which comes immediately afterward. Regardless of the stature of the subject (let's say it's the President for example, rather than a first term Congresswoman), or Internet exposure of the information (let's assume even the simplest of Google searches will return the exact birth date), WP:DOB makes it possible for any subject to request their exact DOB be omitted and Wikipedia renders that courtesy. There is nothing in the policy about second guessing the subject's intentions or putting an expiration date on their request. If it's important to include the exact month/day here on the subject's Wikipedia entry, we should either 1) contact the subject and ask if they would like to rescind their prior request or 2) amend the WP:DOB policy such that it doesn't give subjects that unconditional courtesy. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 19:50, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- WP:BLPPRIVACY also states that "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object." - I thinks that this can be argued at this point that this has become the case. If anything, it seems that people are coming to this article and asking themselves, "why is the full date missing?".. – Connormah (talk) 23:15, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- WP:BLPPRIVACY is the sentence immediately preceding WP:DOB: "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object. If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year." Thus, we display a subject's DOB if it has been widely published, or if an inference can be drawn, but if a subject complains, we err on the side of caution. Again, a policy change should be sought to put the matter to rest. Additionally, it is unlikely the subject herself personally created the biographical entry at bioguide.congress.gov. That database covers every congressperson since 1774 and is likely maintained by non-elected Government service employees who are charged with assembling the information for congressional records. On that last point (the readers), I certainly agree with you, I'm sure people do come to this article and wonder why the month/day is missing. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 00:52, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
- Include My rushed thoughts are that if the information is PD, we should summarize it here. I have not read related policies though.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:51, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Include: It's the right thing to do, perhaps not by Wikipedia standards, but by encyclopedic standards. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 16:27, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
- Include More well known than before, already published in many sources.--Otterathome (talk) 15:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Include Found in multiple reliable sources, and as a former Federal official (2009), her birthdate was public record in many places now. Inane to withhold something so widely found. Collect (talk) 17:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC) [9] clinches it for me. Collect (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Do not include I have trouble understanding why anyone wants this information on a garden-variety biography. It is not typical for encyclopedias to include birthdates unless there is some particular reason, such as a national holiday on the person's birthday. I suppose that an encyclopedia written by astrologers would include birthdates for everyone, but who else cares about this? Does knowing that the subject is born on January 4th or 5th or 6th (or whatever the date is) really improve your understanding of the person? (Again, for non-astrologers.) The exact date is pretty close to trivia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- Birth dates may may be trivia, but almost every other biography on this encyclopedia provides birth dates, as instructed by the MOS. The question here is whether there is a compelling reason for this article to go against the MOS by providing the year only and not the date. Edge3 (talk) 22:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think that complying with BLP really counts as "going against the MOS". If you think that these are in conflict, then I suggest changing the MOS to reduce trivia and more clearly comply with BLP. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:45, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Birth dates may may be trivia, but almost every other biography on this encyclopedia provides birth dates, as instructed by the MOS. The question here is whether there is a compelling reason for this article to go against the MOS by providing the year only and not the date. Edge3 (talk) 22:55, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- Do not include. WP:BLPPRIVACY is clear about this: "If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year." SlimVirgin (talk) 17:02, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Additional reason to not include I recently emailed Duckworth, and received the following response:
From: Duckworth for Congress <[email protected]> Date: July 31, 2013 Thanks for checking with us - we really appreciate you seeking the congresswoman's input. Rep. Duckworth still prefers that her birthdate not be published. Please let me know if there are additional steps we should take to weigh in. Thank you, Eve, Duckworth for Congress
--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- You've already voted. Hot Stop talk-contribs 01:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Include Privacy can only apply to information that is at least somewhat private. Otherwise, elected officials (and others) could constantly be challenging sourced info on WP on the grounds of so-called "privacy." Arbor8 (talk) 18:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
- Include the information is readily available on her congressional bio. Her concerns about identify theft fall flat unless she can prove she's more likely to have her identity stolen than any of the countless other individuals have who have birthdays listed on Wikipedia. Hot Stop talk-contribs 01:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- It should be noted, Duckworth's Wikipedia bio is the only Congressman Bio, which Wikipeida has no birthday on it.Seeroftruth (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Include Based on Wikipolicy WP:WELLKNOWN, WP:OPENPARA as well as her birthday is published on her official, Congressional bio ([10]) IF she don't like it on wiki, then don't be a congressmen, Her request, considering her status as a "ELECTED PUBLIC FIGURE" precludes and superseeds her desire to keep her bday off of Wikipedia. Duckworth's desire to keep her birthday off of Wikipedia is unreasonable and should be ignored, based on Wikipolicy as stated above, as well as basic Encyclopedic standards. Seeroftruth (talk) 13:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:BLPPRIVACY#Privacy_of_personal_information_and_using_primary_sources, which states, quite clearly: "If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year." That's pretty clear, and there's no "tough cookies" clause. Why exactly do you want to ignore a reasonable request, esp from an elected official who lost two legs while serving her country? The insensitivity in the responses above is rather stunning- plz remember BLPs are people too.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Its rather stunning considering, even Duckworth's Official bio on Congress.gov includes her birthday demonstrates how ridiculous her request is. Also, such compliance with such a ridiculous request, calls in the question the fairness and non-bias place Wikipedia should have on Political Bios. as well, it should be noted that Duckworth is the ONLY one of the 500 Plus Congressmen listed on Wikipedia? What makes her so special is to warrant this special treatment?Seeroftruth (talk) 14:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think it's a ridiculous request, and publication elsewhere doesn't mean much. We don't have to dig into details as to why she doesn't want it listed here - it's a simple fact that she doesn't. We would do the same for any other figure on wikipedia who made the same request - so if 500 congressmen request it tomorrow, we should delete their birthdates too. We're not giving her special treatment, we are giving her standard treatment accorded to all bios and enshrined in our policy.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:44, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Its rather stunning considering, even Duckworth's Official bio on Congress.gov includes her birthday demonstrates how ridiculous her request is. Also, such compliance with such a ridiculous request, calls in the question the fairness and non-bias place Wikipedia should have on Political Bios. as well, it should be noted that Duckworth is the ONLY one of the 500 Plus Congressmen listed on Wikipedia? What makes her so special is to warrant this special treatment?Seeroftruth (talk) 14:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:BLPPRIVACY#Privacy_of_personal_information_and_using_primary_sources, which states, quite clearly: "If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth, or the person is borderline notable, err on the side of caution and simply list the year." That's pretty clear, and there's no "tough cookies" clause. Why exactly do you want to ignore a reasonable request, esp from an elected official who lost two legs while serving her country? The insensitivity in the responses above is rather stunning- plz remember BLPs are people too.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:54, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Kommentar - This is not a valid topic for an RfC, as any calls to "include" are moot per WP:BLPPRIVACY, which is part of a policy page. BLP policy cannot be occasionally be set aside as guidelines can, so if there is objection to how the Wikipedia currently treats date of birth and the subject's wishes therein, you would have to make your case at Wikipedia talk:BLP and gain consensus for a policy change first. Tarc (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Policy: or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object -- I suggest her official Congressional bio is "linked to the subject" and that she did not object to the DOB being in it. Collect (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- I think you need to brush up on your reading skills a bit. The first few sentences describe what we do in normally in regards to date-of-birth and BLPs. The Next sentence tells what the exceptions are; a) the subject requests removal, or b) the subject's notability is notable. Condition "a" is satisfied. Case closed. The only thing this hinges on is whether the person requesting the deletion is verifiably the subject...if that is going to be a nitpick, then all we have to do is point her or to WP:OTRS. Tarc (talk) 15:16, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Policy: or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object -- I suggest her official Congressional bio is "linked to the subject" and that she did not object to the DOB being in it. Collect (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Include This is an encyclopedia, not a data base of information. Its sourced and its notable. And we cannot simply remove reliably sourced and notable information from an article simply because some random ip or new account "claims" to be the person in question.--JOJ Hutton 14:44, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Did you read the email cited above? That was sent to me from her official congressional account, after I posted a query on her official web page. If you have doubts, I encourage you to write her directly and ask her yourself, or I can forward the email to you. I'm an editor in good standing here, I don't know Duckworth and have never heard of her until this discussion, and have no reason to make sh*t up.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Your email is not a reliable source for her information, nor would mine be. And if being a editor in good standing, which you are, is enough of a reason to add or remove information from Wikipedia, then we wouldn't need sources or proof at all.--JOJ Hutton 15:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- That is an absurd argument. We are talking about exluding information not adding it, and removing information does not require reliable sources but a consensus of editors in good standing. What is your reason to assume that someone other than Duckworth would email Obi Wan Kenobi to have the birthdate removed. AGF applies. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 16:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- I agree. If you notice, the staffer who responded to the email even asked if there was more they could do. Are we really going to force them to send a formal request in triplicate to WP:OTRS? The only other possibility is that I'm making this all up, which, frankly, is absurd.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:22, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Just to be extra clear, Duckworth's staffer did not initiate the conversation with me. I asked a question on her official website, and her staffer responded a few days later (having presumably talked to her). That exchange was way more than enough for me.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- That is an absurd argument. We are talking about exluding information not adding it, and removing information does not require reliable sources but a consensus of editors in good standing. What is your reason to assume that someone other than Duckworth would email Obi Wan Kenobi to have the birthdate removed. AGF applies. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 16:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Your email is not a reliable source for her information, nor would mine be. And if being a editor in good standing, which you are, is enough of a reason to add or remove information from Wikipedia, then we wouldn't need sources or proof at all.--JOJ Hutton 15:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Did you read the email cited above? That was sent to me from her official congressional account, after I posted a query on her official web page. If you have doubts, I encourage you to write her directly and ask her yourself, or I can forward the email to you. I'm an editor in good standing here, I don't know Duckworth and have never heard of her until this discussion, and have no reason to make sh*t up.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 14:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- DO NOT Include per the WP policy on BLP DOBs, and the policy on the misuse of primary sources in BLPs. These policies are crystal clear on this issue: "If the subject complains about the inclusion of the date of birth ... simply list the year." (from WP:DOB) and "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth ..." (from WP:BLPPRIMARY). I agree with Tarc, we should not even be having this discussion. If you don't like the BLP policy, feel free to begin a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons. Until that policy is changed, any further discussion here is moot. -Wine Guy~Talk 16:09, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Except it's not solely primary sources that we're relying on. Multiple secondary sources that I have linked above do include the full date. – Connormah (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- The sources argument isn't important, what is important is that the subject has made their wishes known, and per policy, the full DOB can be kept out. There is no wigle room here; if you want wiggle room, then goto the BLP talk page and propose a change in policy. Tarc (talk) 19:36, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)Yes, I should clarify a bit. My point in referring to BLPPrimary is that many here are arguing that since her DOB is listed on her official congressional webpage that it should be fair game. I would suggest that her webpage falls into the category of being both a primary source and a public record; while there are other sources, the congressional page is specifically excluded from consideration according to our policy. Regardless, the WP:DOB issue still applies. That the information is available elsewhere should not give us latitude to casually throw BLP policy out the window. –Wine Guy~Talk 19:50, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Include As a Member of Congress, she has no reasonable expectation that this information would be kept private. --rogerd (talk) 20:45, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
- Former good article nominees
- Biography articles of living people
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (military) articles
- Low-importance biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- B-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- Old requests for Biography peer review
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- B-Class Asian Americans articles
- Mid-importance Asian Americans articles
- WikiProject Asian Americans articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
- Low-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
- B-Class Chicago articles
- Mid-importance Chicago articles
- WikiProject Chicago articles
- B-Class Hawaii articles
- Low-importance Hawaii articles
- WikiProject Hawaii articles
- B-Class military history articles
- B-Class military aviation articles
- Military aviation task force articles
- B-Class North American military history articles
- North American military history task force articles
- B-Class United States military history articles
- United States military history task force articles
- B-Class Women's History articles
- Low-importance Women's History articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- WikiProject Women's History articles
- B-Class U.S. Congress articles
- Unknown-importance U.S. Congress articles
- Unknown-subject U.S. Congress articles
- Wikipedia requests for comment