Talk:Gurbir Grewal

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.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

New Jersey Mid‑importance

	New Jersey portal This article is part of WikiProject New Jersey, an effort to create, expand, and improve New Jersey–related articles to Wikipedia feature-quality standard. Please join in the discussion.New JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject New JerseyTemplate:WikiProject New JerseyNew Jersey articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

re: the New Jersey Attorney General section

The entire New Jersey Attorney General section needs to be gutted and rewritten. Wikipedia articles are not press releases for politicians. Raw lists of "stuff I've done" are inappropriate. Possible fixes include:

expanding each section to discuss their successes (or failures) in court. The fact that a prosecutor makes a novel charge tells the reader nothing about whether the novel charge will be upheld.
scrap the section entirely.

I favor the former approach if and only if actual court decisions are available. Given the timing, however, I don't think courts have actually had a chance to decide any of those cases. In the absence of balancing data, I think the entire section should be scrapped. However, I recognize that is a pretty significant edit and would appreciate feedback before being bold. Rossami (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]