Talk:Trupti Patel

tags
Seems like in the best of all possible worlds, we'd have a citation for Meadow's 73 million statistic and for the RSS' response. Maybe these citations already exist in the parent article on Meadow; I didn't check that ... Keesiewonder talk 21:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was just adding the references, and you caused an edit conflict with the fact tags. Grrrrrrr! Actually, you're quite right, and I should have added them at the time. I'll try to incorporate them now! :) ElinorD (talk) 21:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah! Brilliant minds ... Sorry about that; keep up the nice work! Keesiewonder talk 21:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Done it! It wasn't actually as troublesome as I thought it was going to be! ElinorD (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, based on this, you should probably have removed all my hard work instead of tagging it. I'd really have been cursing you then! ElinorD (talk) 21:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks good! I'm more of an inclusionist than to remove good efforts. When in doubt, I'd fall to JW's lead, but I tend mostly to follow my own instincts which have fared me well. Anyway, as I'm sure you've discovered, it's when people don't want to collaborate that things begin to get messy ... Keesiewonder talk 21:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Year of birth and original research
I was looking for a source that would give Trupti Patel's year of birth. I know that for WP:BLP reasons, we don't give full dates of birth, unless the person is so famous that everybody knows it (for example, Prince William of Wales). At the time that Mrs Patel was acquitted, reputable news sources reported that "a thirty-five-year-old pharmacist" had been found not guilty. She was aquitted on 11 June 2003, so to be 35 at that time, she must have been born either in 1967 (second half) or 1968 (first half). This article from The Times says that her family arrived in Britain in 1965, and she was born two years later. I happily added 1967 to the article, giving The Times as a source, and then had second thoughts and removed it. I don't think we need have any concerns about adding just a year of birth (without day and month) if we can find a reliable source that gives it, but it struck me that perhaps I was carrying out original research and synthesising published material to come up with my own conclusion.

If a reliable source had said that the family moved to Britain on 4 August 1965, and she was born "exactly two years later", I wouldn't have had any qualms. But I suppose it's possible for a newspaper to say "two years later" if a family arrives in Britain in, say, December 1965, and a child is born in January 1968. I've taken it out for now, but would welcome feedback. ElinorD (talk) 11:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I've found other sources that gave 1967 as her year of birth, but these websites did not (to me at least) have the same status as The Times or BBC News. I'll keep looking. ElinorD (talk) 00:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)