Talk:Samuel Alito/Archive 1

message: Saxe is currently listed under both First Amendment and Harassment and Discrimination.  I realize it fits under both but it seems redundent to me.  Which should we list it under? --Benna 02:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Saxe v. State College Area School District

message: We should strive to balance the number of quotes from those opposing Alito and those supporting Alito in this section. 
I ran a quick wordcount on this section. I see 254 words in opposition of Alito, 126 in support of Alito, and 68 neutral (Sen. Feinstein's comment.)
In addition, this section:
:In contrast, supporters of the president contend that what senator Kerry characterizes as the "far right wing" is a key segment of American society that deserves an equal voice and equal representation. They point out that President Bush promised those who would vote for him that he would appoint a justice to the Supreme Court that would be a so-called strict constructionist, and now he is fulfillling his campaign promise.
should either be given a source, or replaced. -Chardish 17:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section "Reaction to the nomination" 

message: Is there a source for this? --Elliskev 22:05, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed until we can get a source. It seems like way too specific information to remain unsourced. Things like "Alito is a judge" don't need sources, things like this do. - Chardish 03:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Draft Lottery Info

message: Anon 85.155.133.201 changed his degree from "A.B." to "B.A." I reverted it, because: 1) them Ivy Leaguish schools often do stuff like that, for reasons only known to themselves, and b) I found a couple of cites which lists his degree as an "A.B." See http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=MZZ22876 and http://air.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=26, a .gov site which likely has some cred.--RattBoy 17:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia: "A.B." vs. "B.A."

message: In the article it says "supported limited abortion rights in 3 out of 4 rulings as described below.", but when you read the four points listed below, it appears only 1 of the 4 supports this stance. I did not research into the actual rulings, but it would seem that either the count is incorrect or the description of the rulings is inaccurate.
* First, he rules in favor of a restriction law (the one supporting limited rights)
* Second, he rules an abortion restriction unconsitutional
* Third, he strikes down a restriction requiring law enforcement notification
* Fourth, he rules against unborn protection by the government
This is my first discussion submission so go easy on me. 
RyanAlbarelli 06:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Abortion issue count

message: According to his military service records, Samuel Alito Sr. was born in New Jersey in 1914, not Italy.  Rillian 01:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Alito Sr an immigrant?

message: How many of the 12 Supreme Court cases that he argued, did he win?
Merecat 07:51, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  USSC wins? 

message: This secion is clearly not neutral:
"The memory loss is not credible when it is known in 1985 Alito bragged in his job application, as a credential, his memebership in CAP."
1) It's not clear how listing an organization qualifies as "bragging"
2) It's not any sort of established fact that his memory loss did or did not happen
ShaneB 16:16, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV problem 

message: With the mix of numbered URL links and footnotes, the numbers are not correct in the notes section.  Recommend this be changed to one or the other. --Gadget850 18:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Links & footnotes

message: Shouldn't this section be integrated into the Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination entry? Especially since it's on the main page; the link there leads to nothing about the hearings themselves.
--bbsrock
Agree  Most of the material in this article related to the confirmation process and controversies should be moved to the Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination article.  A paragraph should remain here summarizing. --Paul 17:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Confirmation hearing section

message: Can someone confirm the part about Alito having put the business about "warming a seat on the Supreme Court" in his yearbook?  Other sources are reporting that this was written by a friend, about Alito. -- Charlie (Colorado) 00:48, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picky Detail: Alito's yearbook

message: Feel free to update my link to Alito's Casey opinion, if you can find a more NPOV/verifiable source. Jpers36 05:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Casey link 

message: There's a neutrality dispute tag at the top of the article.  Is it really necessary?  Reading the talk page I don't see much that's disputed except a few items in the "Trivia" section, which doesn't sound to me like it merits a tag at the top of the page.  Elliotreed 19:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: POV tag removed. No enumerated issues. 5 November 2005
I still haven't found any enumerated issues on this page aside from a dispute about the "trivia" section, nor an explanation of why the POV tag is there.  I'm going to take it off.  If someone thinks it should be there, please enumerate some issues here. Elliotreed 23:59, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

text: And if someone does do so, and the dispute is limited to the trivia section, it would be preferable to put the POV tag in that section instead of at the top of the article. --Delirium 03:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Tag 

message: I hate to be too blunt, but this man's article would be nothing more than a stub if it wasn't for his Supreme Court nomination. Does anyone else think it would be appropriate to have a message linking to Samuel Alito Supreme Court nomination at the top of the page? -Greg Asche (talk) 22:25, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes; good idea. Executing. Septentrionalis 04:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to SCOTUS nom up top? 

message: *Alito and wife, Martha, live in West Caldwell, New Jersey. He has two children: a son in college and a daughter in high school. 
*The comment about his having been rated "well qualified" to be a Circuit Court judge fifteen years ago looks like unacceptable POV when put at the top of the article.  --Elliotreed 20:03, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Introductory statement

message: Or something simialr?--Elliskev 21:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Personal life'
should his kid's name's be de-linked.  they aren't notable and won't have an article on them.Kiwidude 05:58, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Correct.
The Washington Post quote looks like unbalanced POV.  Isn't whether he'll let his personal views color his judicial judgments one of the major points of contention in the nomination battle? --Elliotreed 15:51, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I added that the WP attributes those sentiments to his friends.  It may have been somewhat misleading (it may have beenn assumed that the WP carried those sentiments), but I wouldn't call it POV.  Not every statement about a person is POV, even if it's nice.  It would be POV if the article says those nice things about him, butit doesn't it says that his friends say those nice things about him - which may be irrelevant, but, again, not POV.--Elliskev 16:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Early Life >> Personal Life

message: Why is there a separate article for the nomination?  It seems redundant to me. The Monster 13:43, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The nomination is an event, the person is a person - and if all of what will end up in the 2 articles went into one, it would end up being too long anyway. See the separate John Roberts bio and confirmation articles for support of that premise. BD2412 T 14:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  nomination 

message: Catholic, born in New Jersey and being nicknamed "Scalito": any Italian-American roots ?
Anyway, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., the A.:Adriano, Alphonso, Alberto, Antonino (like Scalia), Antonio, Agostino or Apollo ???  15.00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
*You know, it could be something mundane like "Arthur", or "Andrew" - after all, his first name is Samuel. BD2412 T 16:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Italian American]] 

message: Can anyone provide a reference to prove that, "His two younger brothers also serve as judges in the Third Court of Appeals." I can't and the article about the thrid court of appeals wasn't helpful. ~Some fake info has been slipped into this article before. Broken S
No others with that last name listed on official site.  I'll remove it for now. Jokestress 19:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference requested

message: Why are all the words in the statements by the Democratic senators capitalized? 68.77.59.61 18:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that's the formatting that Republican National Committee press releases use. That section was copied verbatim from an RNC press release . Eliot 18:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Caps? 

message: There are a very large selection of Alito opinions.  How are we going to make this information reasonable and consumable.  Certainly we can't add all of them.  Indeed, there are even too many "juicy" opinions.  What do you guys think? mmmbeerT / C / ? 21:29, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinions(format)

message: I think Elliotreed's edits creates an informational bias in the article as many of them removed the majority opinions overruling him.  I think this information belongs in as well as Elliot's revisions
*I disagree.  Presenting both sides creates a point-counterpoint dynamic that makes it difficult to maintain NPOV - one side of the debate is likely to be less fairly represented than the other, and just presenting Alito's opinions makes it clear what is being presented and what is not.  If you can present both sides and maintain NPOV I have no objection.  However, I would note that the majority opinions are not technically "overruling."  Elliotreed 02:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's the problem with informational bias - sometimes leaving out important comments from the majority decision overruling him will falsely inflate the validity of his position.  The lack of information can constitute POV-bias.  -- Lordkazan 02:35, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, fair enough.  So far the additions I've seen look good.  Elliotreed 02:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Elliotreed's edits on case descriptions

message: Alito is Seen as a Methodical Jurist with a Clear Record, New York Times, November 1, 2005.  The article contains a lot of details about his early life and career; not just political interpretation.  Postdlf 15:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good reference for biography 

message: I am restoring the summary of ACLU v. Schundler. I think it is a fair summary of what was novel in the case as opposed to upholding past runings. . If people disagree after reading the case, please discuss it here or edit the summary. The existing article on the case is a stub that needs work. I added the intro from the decision --agr 17:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The two main problems are that: 1) The case held multiple things, striking down one display and upholding another one.  Why does this summary only mention the upholding part?; and 2) The quote from the case actually has nothing at all to do with this, and is discussing the more technical issue of whether city officials acted in "good faith" or not, not whether the display should be actually permitted. --Delirium 22:54, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This change (eliminating my text) looks good to me.  I seem to have skimmed the Lexis brief too quickly.  Elliotreed 06:18, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ACLU v. Schundler 

message: :* Steven Colbert of the Colbert Report, a news satire program on the Comedy Channel has raised hackles with his black humor about popery and papist plots on the Supreme Court (responding to the new proposed Roman Catholic majority on the court), charging that with the Alito nomination, there is finally a "pipeline to the Vatican" and the pope on the court  (Aired October 31, 2005, 11:30 P.M. EST).
Does this belong here? I know it was taken out earlier and now I see back in, so I thought I was start a discussion here on the talk page. Viper Daimao 20:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It should go. Jokes don't belong in biographical articles. - Chardish 22:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comedy Central in Media commentary section

message: I propose moving the comment by Judge Alito's mother to Wikiquote and removing the Media comments section altogether. Objections? Jokestress 03:23, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the quote belongs in this artice. Abortion is likely to be the central issue in the nomination fight and his mother's opinion is relevant.  I have no problem with getting rid of the rest of the section. I'd also lose or trim the Halloween bit in trivia. The Catholic majority question deserves mention in the context of statements by some Church leaders that Catholics who do not uphold Church teachings on abortion in their official duties should be denied communion. --agr 13:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How would the 'statements of some church leaders' be relevant to this article? Does that statement need to go into every article about a Catholic politician?--Elliskev 13:42, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media commentary to Wikiquote?