Jump to content

Talk:Brett Kavanaugh: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary
→‎Julie Swetnick: new section
Line 53: Line 53:
The info box just below Kavanuagh's photo says "Incumbent". Is that an artefact that should be removed? [[User:BobEnyart|Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host ]] ([[User talk:BobEnyart|talk]]) 20:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
The info box just below Kavanuagh's photo says "Incumbent". Is that an artefact that should be removed? [[User:BobEnyart|Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host ]] ([[User talk:BobEnyart|talk]]) 20:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
:These seems to be an artifact of the infobox judge template. If you look on the infobox examples page, most of the judges display that way. I have placed a note on the talk page of that template. [[User:ResultingConstant|ResultingConstant]] ([[User talk:ResultingConstant|talk]]) 21:09, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
:These seems to be an artifact of the infobox judge template. If you look on the infobox examples page, most of the judges display that way. I have placed a note on the talk page of that template. [[User:ResultingConstant|ResultingConstant]] ([[User talk:ResultingConstant|talk]]) 21:09, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

== Julie Swetnick ==

Without getting into a loud argument with dozens of people, and rehashing the entire incident, I would like to suggest the paragraph on Julie Swetnick be removed. Not only because it is the least plausible, but because the lawyer involved, Mr. Avenatti, has been indicted for multiple counts of fraud. This indictment appears to confirm the questionable motives of the attorney and hints that the entire claim of Ms. Swetnick was a mere publicity stunt on behalf of Avenatti. It is unfair to Justice Kavanaugh under WP:BLP to have this allegation kept on his biography, and removing it would not harm the article. The fraud indictment of Mr. Avenatti so soon after the convenient Swetnick story suggests that the claim itself is fraudulent.[[User:AlexanderSoul|AlexanderSoul]] ([[User talk:AlexanderSoul|talk]]) 20:44, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:44, 17 April 2019

Template:Vital article

Confusing sentence needs grammar fix

This sentence:

In his dissent, Linda Greenhouse says Kavanaugh criticized the majority...

Probably should read something like this:

In his dissent, according to Linda Greenhouse (a NY Times opinion writer), Kavanaugh criticized the majority...

Or better yet, maybe this Greenhouse quote is not particularly relevant. She is a journalist who made the assertion in her NT Times article. A better entry would use the Kavanaugh quote and cite the actual Kavanaugh document as support, rather than a newspaper article.

Documents: Law Library of Congress and National Archives

  • https://www.loc.gov/law/find/kavanaugh.php
  • https://search.archives.gov/search?affiliate=national-archives&query="Brett+Kavanaugh"
  • david ferriero. "National Archives Works to Release Records Related to Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh". archives.gov.

Removal of party from scotus justice pages?

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject United States courts and judges#Removal of party from scotus justice pages. jhawkinson (talk) 21:35, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incumbent?

The info box just below Kavanuagh's photo says "Incumbent". Is that an artefact that should be removed? Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host (talk) 20:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These seems to be an artifact of the infobox judge template. If you look on the infobox examples page, most of the judges display that way. I have placed a note on the talk page of that template. ResultingConstant (talk) 21:09, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Julie Swetnick

Without getting into a loud argument with dozens of people, and rehashing the entire incident, I would like to suggest the paragraph on Julie Swetnick be removed. Not only because it is the least plausible, but because the lawyer involved, Mr. Avenatti, has been indicted for multiple counts of fraud. This indictment appears to confirm the questionable motives of the attorney and hints that the entire claim of Ms. Swetnick was a mere publicity stunt on behalf of Avenatti. It is unfair to Justice Kavanaugh under WP:BLP to have this allegation kept on his biography, and removing it would not harm the article. The fraud indictment of Mr. Avenatti so soon after the convenient Swetnick story suggests that the claim itself is fraudulent.AlexanderSoul (talk) 20:44, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]