This article was nominated for deletion on October 29 2017. The result of the discussion was delete. |
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. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Berman joins a long line of notable persons who have been U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, including Henry L. Stimson, Robert M. Morgenthau, Robert Fiske, Rudy Giuliani, Mary Jo White, James B. Comey, and Preet Bharara.
Appending that to the lead has a puff aspect to my eye. In particular, the verb "joins" is a PR mainstay, especially in the way it glosses over how he's interim and all the rest were (presumably) confirmed appointments.
But even if you fix the verb, it's still a one-of-these-things does not entirely belong on this list kind of affair. And what does it really say about Berman, himself? Nothing. Nothing at all. Yet it's presently half of Berman's lead, as if the man is so dwarfed by the ancestral portraits lining the white marble halls as to barely exist as his own man (as seen in The Denethor Scenario). — MaxEnt 17:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Added the charges brought against Hernandez due to their relevance in pop culture and the severity of the charges could end the career of a pop culture icon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UCOChris (talk • contribs) 22:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:51, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
What religion is Berman? Jewish? There is no mention of his religion at all in the article. Thanks to anybody who can answer / put it in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.34.86 (talk) 05:49, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
No need for religious identification, especially since you seem to be seeking the information based on religious prejudice. 2A01:E0A:E:9050:2951:2BB5:F63B:1AD9 (talk) 12:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
I added a "dubious" tag to the infobox claim that Craig Carpenito will succeed Berman as US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, because it is unclear whether Carpenito is legally eligible to replace Berman on an acting basis. See the "2020 disputed ouster" section of the article. Law professor Steve Vladeck has said: "Because Berman was appointed under 546(d), even if the President can remove him, he can only be replaced by: 1) Someone nominated by the President & confirmed by the Senate; or 2) Someone *else* appointed by judges under 546(d). Carpenito is neither of those." [1] Tony Tan · talk 05:03, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
The Early Life section references a Bloomberg News article titled "Giuliani Law Partner Named Top New York Federal Prosecutor," and that title gives the impression that Berman and Guiliani worked together ("were partners"). I don't see any evidence of that, and the Bloomberg article later makes more clear that Berman and Giuliani both held the title of "partner" at Greenberg Traurig, although GT calls that position "shareholder," which is more clear. (I have, however, seen people confused about the relationship between Berman and Giuliani; I recently edited this article to use "shareholder" when discussing them to avoid potential misinterpretation). I am a little concerned that the reference to the Bloomberg article by its title may cause readers to improperly assume a relationship between Berman and Giuliani which never existed (or, at least, there doesn't seem to be any evidence of, but perhaps it's just my ignorance; but BLP). I realize that only happens if people read the references and make assumptions or draw conclusions, so this is not a problem of large magnitude. Still, I'm not quite sure what to do about it, if anything. Some possibilities:
I really don't know, so I thought I would pose this here. Thanks. jhawkinson (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, Berman is still the U.S. Attorney for SDNY, and the infobox should not list his term as ending June 20. The situation is this: Barr said Berman had "stepped down"; Berman said he had not resigned and did not intend to. Barr then claimed that Trump had fired him, but Trump denies it. And according to our article it is unclear whether either Barr or Trump has the legal right to fire him. So right now the situation is very unclear, but I don't think we can state as fact that his term is over or that he is out of office. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
This section mainly cites DOJ primary sources (which don't prove notability), and the cases don't have their own Wikipedia articles. If this section is to be kept, it should cite third-party sources that prove the cases/prosecutions are notable by WP standards. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)