This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Julia Baird (journalist) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of the Australian Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australian Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Australian Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Australian Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Australian Women in ReligionAustralian Women in Religion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Latest comment: 4 months ago6 comments4 people in discussion
I have removed a birth year altogether, as 1967 is simply impossible. We have multiple sources indicating that she is the younger sister of Mike Baird, who was born in April 1968. This article says she is 18 months younger, but that leaves 1969/70 as possibilities. Finally, in this article, she explicitly calls us out for being wrong (and apparently someone was emailed about this too). I have no idea why this source, which is hardly authoritative, was being prioritised over so much evidence. Frickeg (talk) 03:16, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
We need a source that actually gives a birthdate/year to include the information. Given the above, I think leaving it out is the best solution for now, but I think it's fairly obvious that the reason the source was 'being prioritised' is simply because it was the only source that actually gives a year. Happy to accept on the above that it is wrong, but it would still be WP:OR and WP:SYNTH to extrapolate a date from the above. Melcous (talk) 04:20, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
I understand that, but my point is that when we are relying on a source that is not exactly a formal biography, and when a date is being repeatedly questioned, it is a good idea to investigate a little to see whether there is any substance to the dispute rather than reverting to re-insert the year. I understand everything here has been done in good faith, and in all honesty I probably would have done exactly what you did in this situation. But I just think that it's worth all of us bearing in mind for the future, especially considering it has led to the subject publicly declaring the page to be inaccurate. Frickeg (talk) 05:25, 17 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
There is no notability in the subject's date of birth (or marital status), and Wikipedia is not a gossip magazine. Online trolls, identity theft, etc are serious issues, and I think Wikipedia should avoid unnecessarily providing them fuel. So, as per WP:BLPPRIVACY, I believe the date of birth should be left out. 1292simon (talk) 00:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
We don't know what the date of birth is, so that shouldn't be a problem! :) Frickeg (talk) 10:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
All the trolls had to say...
Considering all the issues covered by the journalist, is it not telling how the only thing a Media Tart wishes to bang on about is her age? Given such a limited attitude, and taking account of the resent downfall of female leaders, might not the points addressed within Media Tarts make a useful section?
Shades of: "All the papers had to say
Was that Marilyn was found in the nude"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.103.46 (talk) 11:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
.svg){kind=logo}
.jpg){kind=small}