Talk:Reports: US judge Matthew Kacsmaryk redacted name of corporation he owned stock in on disclosure forms

Duplicate

@Ottawahitech: Presumably, Ethics of Texas judge in abortion pill case raise questions is a duplicate of this? If so, please add {{delete|author}} to that article so it can be speedily deleted in favor of this one. Heavy Water (talk) 16:54, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Review of revision 4722822 [Not ready]

Revision 4722822 of this article has been reviewed by JJLiu112 (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 23:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: WN:Paywall, Washington Post. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: None added. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 4722822 of this article has been reviewed by JJLiu112 (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 23:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: WN:Paywall, Washington Post. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: None added. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Reviewer's comments on newsworthiness/ABA's referencing of CNN, the other source

I know it is rare for us to ever just report on exclusives, but I'd argue this is different. WaPo has followed up per the ABA, though it's not clear if they've confirmed it. And two quotes are in this article, both of which happen to have been given to CNN. This is my view, but I'd like to get a second opinion in a case such as this. Heavy Water (talk) 14:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

ABA, in other words, is being used sort of like a stand-in for the paywalled The Washington Post. Heavy Water (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I think that's fine, because by elsewhere reporting it's not an exclusive, rather 'first revealed by' or etc. I'll review it tonight; it's been a busy few days. JJLiu112 (talk) 18:14, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Review of revision 4724091 [Passed]

Revision 4724091 of this article has been reviewed by Heavy Water (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 21:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I did a lot of editing here, including for factual errors. See edit history for specifics. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4724091 of this article has been reviewed by Heavy Water (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 21:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I did a lot of editing here, including for factual errors. See edit history for specifics. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

And this, all along, was a very minimal article for the amount of detail the sources provided, like about CNN's investigation into whether the company was Publix. Heavy Water (talk) 21:48, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Edit

{{editprotected}}

Please remove Category:Judges; it's an internal cat. Heavy Water (talk) 22:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Done. [₂₄Cr][talk] 12:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)