Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States courts and judges

This page is within the scope of WikiProject United States courts and judges, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States federal courts, courthouses, and United States federal judges 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.United States courts and judgesWikipedia:WikiProject United States courts and judgesTemplate:WikiProject United States courts and judgesUnited States courts and judges

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Talk:John Roberts#Requested move 7 February 2025

A proposal has been made at Talk:John Roberts#Requested move 7 February 2025 to move John Roberts to John G. Roberts that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. BD2412 T 21:01, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Maria Lanahan created

I have created Draft:Maria Lanahan as her nomination has been announced. She lacks sufficient notability to go to article space prior to confirmation. Additionally, another editor created Josh Divine in article space. I will create the remaining two articles in draft space shortly. Safiel (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding that I have now created Draft:Zachary Bluestone and Draft:Cristian Stevens as well. Stevens could conceivably pass the notability guidelines and go to article space prior to confirmation, but needs to be fleshed out first. Lanahan and Bluestone both need to stay in draft space until confirmation. Safiel (talk) 06:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has nominated Emil Bove for good article status, perhaps not a good time to do so

Another editor has nominated Emil Bove for good article status, no review has been opened as yet. First of all, I think would fail as is. But more importantly, we are on the cusp of what will be an extremely contentious confirmation process where a lot of dirt will be dug up and rancor will happen, meaning the article will be in flux. NOT a good time to have a GA review. I am not sure if it is proper for a non-involved editor to deep six the process by removing the GA template before a review is opened, but this just seems a bad moment for this. I would like some insight. Just to be sure, I will NOT remove the template without receiving substantial positive insight from other editors here. Safiel (talk) 18:24, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: Definitely should get an admin's thoughts on this. Safiel (talk) 18:28, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ElijahPepe: Pinging in the editor who made the nomination. Safiel (talk) 18:31, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would tend to agree that an article that is inevitably going to undergo substantial change in the near future would be too unstable to navigate the GA process in any sort of short order. A better picture is definitely needed, which is not exactly a GA concern, but is not a good look for an article nominated for that status. BD2412 T 18:43, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, here are my thoughts. Firstly, I was not blindsided by Trump's announcement nominating Bove to the Third Circuit; it was The New York Times' article revealing that Trump planned to name Bove that brought me to edit the article. The larger point here is about the stability of the article, and I wholeheartedly disagree so long as the review begins right now or after the confirmation process. It is impossible to determine the extent of what might be discovered in Bove's forthcoming confirmation hearing, and refusing to allow a GAN on the basis would be improper. Dan Caine is a similar case. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to go ahead fine. I think you would have a better shot at a GA promotion if you wait a few months. Not to mention if the article is promoted and then gets shredded during the confirmation battle, it could turn around and be demoted. Go ahead if you like, I just think that patience is better suited for this situation. Safiel (talk) 19:23, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Judge Mills Lane

Almost three months ago, I proposed that we merge this with Mills Lane, but I got no response. It's been unsourced for 15 and 1/2 years. What do you think? Bearian (talk) 18:37, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Zach Bluestone#Requested move 25 July 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Zach Bluestone#Requested move 25 July 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 03:33, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]