Talk:Susan Steinberg (author)

Birthyear
Pinging editors, , , , and.

User:Susansteinberg (presumably the subject of the article) writes that she considers the birthyear private info and would like it removed. IMO, it's not a slam-dunk per WP:BLPPRIVACY and available refs like. I'm all for erring on the side of caution in WP:BLP:s, but it seems to me that we are doing that.

Opinions? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:45, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * My inclination would be to abide by the subject's wish for privacy, though does it confuse the issue that there is another person of the same name without a birthdate? Proscribe (talk) 09:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


 * "My" refs seems to be about the right Steinberg, if that's what you meant. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:24, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I meant potentially confusing for anyone looking up the name, both of them being American writers...or is that overthinking? Proscribe (talk) 09:55, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I think the disambigs will generally do the trick. People can always get confused (but you made me remember this story). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:58, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Gråbergs Gråa Sång – nice story! I'll leave it to other editors to continue this discussion now. I believe it was User:Madw0r1d who originally added the birthyear. Proscribe (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I concur that the birthdate should be removed. Something like a birth year should be substantiated by more than just electronic catalog entries. A library catalog doesn't tell us anything about how whoever programmed it verified the author's info. For all we know, it could be someone in a backroom just typing in dates. Without a more substantial source, I agree we should respect Steinberg's request. Altamel (talk) 02:56, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Not unreasonable, unless there's objections I'll remove it in a few days. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:27, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The subject also has reached out to me with a request to remove the birth date from the article. I would agree with the removal of the birthdate from the page as soon as it possible. RickinBaltimore (talk) 11:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Request edit on 16 April 2020
Please remove the birth date -- which now appears twice. This is personal information to me, the subject. For personal reasons I need to ask that this information be removed.

It was once removed and now has returned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susansteinberg (talk • contribs) 18:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Again, I'm asking for the birth date to be removed from this page -- in both places. As the subject of this page, the public sharing of this private information is putting me in a vulnerable situation, and I would like it removed. I would hope I have some say as to what's on this page about me, particularly if this information is private. It was already removed once, but someone keeps putting it back. This isn't right.

Thanks a lot for weighing in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susansteinberg (talk • contribs) 00:23, 17 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Hello! To be blunt, no, you don't have some say, but you are welcome to make suggestions (or suggest references to include stuff) like you just did. If they are inline with WP:s policies and guidelines, people may listen. Part of the point of WP is that the subject doesn't control the article, be it a professor, politician, company or charitable organization. Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia is a thing, so your approach here is appreciated.


 * I stated my opinion on the inclusion in the thread above, hopefully other editors will comment, and you are welcome to respond in that discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:43, 17 April 2020 (UTC)


 * As has removed the DOB from the article, I added an editor note so that other editors are made aware of these discussions.  Schazjmd   (talk)  17:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * (feel free to remove your post if you don't want it there) I thought I'd mention why I removed the note; generally speaking commented-out notes like that are only for when there has been repeated back-and-forth good-faith editing to attempt to add the content. The page has largely been stable, so until there's a "need" for such a note it's best to just leave it as-is; in my experience such notes tend to make people want to find that information so they can add it. Primefac (talk) 17:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)