Talk:Ruth Marcus (journalist)

Birth date
There's recently been a slow and polite edit conflict between one birth date and another. I've no reason to think that either side didn't mean the best, but neither date has come with any evidence. When I look for evidence even for the year (let alone the date), I see nothing that's particularly credible; instead, just dodgy web pages whose meagre content could well have been derived from earlier states of the Wikipedia article. I have therefore removed day, month and year of her birth.

Hurried editors should be careful not to confuse this person (said to have been born in 1958) with the journalist and photographer Ruth Marcus, who was born in 1958.

Pinging General Ization. -- Hoary (talk) 23:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Not sure why you're pinging me. I have reverted two edits here.  was obvious vandalism, and  was lacking a valid source for its claim that the subject is a deputy editorial page editor for the Washington Post and a change to her political affiliation. The fact that the second also changed her birth date without citing a reliable source was coincidental, but also supported its reversion, whether or not a source was cited for the original birth date.  See WP:BURDEN.   General Ization   Talk   00:02, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The pinging wasn't meant to imply criticism, General Ization. This article indeed has a history of vandalism. (This talk page has a history of stupidity, too.) Thank you for battling against it. In a context of vandalism, you might well have assumed that a change of birth date was another, minor example of vandalism. Possibly it was. But the date that was changed from is no more credible than is the date that was changed to. I thought you might like to be alerted to this. I hope you agree with my removal of year and month, and of course day. -- Hoary (talk) 08:41, 23 March 2017 (UTC)