Talk:Judy Sheindlin

Judy Sheindlin was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 7, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
January 8, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 22, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
November 19, 2011	Good article reassessment	Kept
March 30, 2020	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

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 sourced must 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.

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers / Politics and Government / Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as High-importance).

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Women writers Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Business Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business 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 in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States courts and judges Low‑importance

	This article 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

August 16 to 22, 2015 (19th)

Archives

/Archive 1

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[reality television#Reality court shows|reality]] The anchor (#Reality court shows) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Judge Judy Death Hoax

There is a hoax email claiming Judge Judy is dead. An email should not be used as a source. Dominick ^(TALK) 15:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Judith Sheindlin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
~~I would like to see the lead expanded a bit - maybe by two or three sentences that help to summarize the article a bit more thoroughly.~~

I've attempted to do that. Happyme22 (talk) 01:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence "But Sheindlin was becoming a rising star, and her fame was spreading." at the end of the Law career section is peacocky and unneeded, IMO.

I'm not so sure. I included that as a sort of transition into the next section, and to inform readers that her fame was indeed spreading. Happyme22 (talk) 01:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that something like this would make a good transition. However, "rising star" and "fame was spreading" are unencyclopedic. Perhaps change it to something like "After her retirement, Sheindlin continued to receive increasing amounts of public attention."

Done. Happyme22 (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Judge Judy section - please tell when she was approached by Big Ticket television.~~

Don't know exactly, but I've narrowed it down. Happyme22 (talk) 01:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Judge Judy section - "Sheindlin extended her contract through the 2011-12 season (its 16th),". Its 16th what?~~

16th season. Clarified. Happyme22 (talk) 01:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
~~I've added a fact tag in one place where I would like to see a reference.~~

I have hopefully resolved that. The divorce is a well-known fact, but the motives were indeed uncited and I cannot seem to find one at this time. Happyme22 (talk) 01:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What makes Ref #3 (MSN) a reliable reference?

I should have clarified; that's MSN Encarta Encyclopedia. The same source is used at other prominent articles, including GA George W. Bush. Happyme22 (talk) 01:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This actually looks to be published by MSN Movies, and written by someone else. How is this reliable?

You are correct. I was confusing this with another source. No matter, though, because I have removed the reference altogether. Happyme22 (talk) 23:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While Ref #4 (Judgejudy.com) is reliable for non-controversial facts about her (where she got her law degree, how many kids she has), it is not reliable for claims made about her (such as the last two sentences of the second paragraph of the Law career section) and as such should be replaced in these latter instances.

I disagree. This is the official biography of Judge Judy and as such I see nothing wrong with citing it for what seems to be significant and important achievements in Sheindlin's career. Happyme22 (talk) 01:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Errrr, yes. Except that it's a biography on a website that is promoting her and her show. That means that everything is going to be shown in the most favorable light possible. Here are the exact phrases I have problems with being cited to this website, and the reasons:

She earned a reputation as one of New York's toughest judges. - If she's the only one saying she has this reputation, then it's not a very solid reputation. If an independent source said she has a reputation, that's one thing; if she says she has a reputation, that's a completely different thing.

Sheindlin is credited with pioneering the idea of an "open court policy", which allowed members of the public and the media to view the proceedings of court, an uncommon practice. - Really? Who credits her with this?

The rest of the things being cited to this I have no problem with, because they are either non-controversial or personal information that she has no reason to try to fudge. However, the above two statements are mainly opinion, and citing an outside opinion (reputation, being credited with something) to the person in question is just asking for it to be biased towards the person giving you the information.

Okay, I have reworded it and provided different citations. Happyme22 (talk) 22:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
There are a few prose/MOS and referencing issues with this article, so I am placing the review on hold for now. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 01:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck the comments that are finished, but I still have questions/problems with a few other things. Dana boomer (talk) 15:14, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Everything looks good, so I'm going to pass this article to GA status. Nice work. Dana boomer (talk) 00:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Sorry about all the confusion. Happyme22 (talk) 05:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Bloomberg

According to FiveThirtyEight's https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-campaign-ads/#candidate=michael-bloomberg&market=ca , Judy Sheindlin's spot for Mike Bloomberg was one "Aired 1,850 times between Jan. 12 and Feb. 5", including in some very prominent national slots, for a cost of over 1 M$. This might be relevant to note if there's a secondary source discussing it. Nemo 18:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lawsuit

Sheindlin has recently been involved in a legal dispute over packaging fees for the show. Coverage of this should be added. It's complicated and I haven't been following it so I won't do it myself.Bill (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Billposer Can you link any sources about this? Alyo (chat·edits) 19:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Here's a recent one. Google: "Judy Sheindlin suit Lawrence" and you'll find quite a few more. https://www.lamag.com/culturefiles/judge-judy-lawsuit/ Bill (talk) 21:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]