kmccoy i agree with you if you look at my changes today i included only the birth dates of the two children who are now adults one of whom has a wikipedia article already with three independent sources for track s birth date of april and i included the birth date for baby trig since he was so much in the news last year i was trying to find a compromise position there is no consensus here for including or for excluding and if you read previous talk pages you will see no consensus there either in the spirit of erring on the side of more information wikipedia s mission is to inform after all i made today s revision the immediate reversion wiping out all birth dates except that of little tripp johnston certainly the most irrelevant birth date of all is a bit risible and does not demonstrate any consensus either as for the sources i shall find better ones but that argument is a red herring no one has found any other birth date for track other than april all the sources weaker or stronger agree on the birth date i have read wp undue it supports including neutral factual information birth dates fall into that category i really don t see where the problem is here i shall not continue to include the birth dates in the article but this demonstrates that wiki articles need more consistent management it is troubling that there is a small minority who insist upon exclusion when wikipedia should stand for inclusion