Talk:Camille Vasquez

RFC: Identification of Law Firm

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is clear consensus against inclusion of the law firm in the lead. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

---

Should the law firm with which Camille Vasquez is associated be mentioned in the lede paragraph of the article and in the infobox? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Please answer Yes or No (or some clear equivalent) in the Survey with a brief explanation of why or why not. Do not reply to other statements in the Survey.

Survey

• No, not in the lede, she is not "best known for her work with the legal firm Brown Rudnick". No opinion on the law firm's inclusion in the infobox. SailingInABathTub (talk) 16:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
• No. It reads better as "best known for her work representing actor Johnny Depp in the defamation case he brought against his ex-wife Amber Heard", striking "with the legal firm Brown Rudnick". I don't see how that detail belongs in the lede. TheSavageNorwegian 16:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
• No. Having in the opening sentence the phrase "best known for her work with the legal firm Brown Rudnick in representing," etc throws the whole article into a state of encyclopaedic imbalance. The legal firms for which she might have worked in the past may have a place in the article, though, due to her young age, that would probably be offering too much detail. But her employment during the trial should, of course, be included in the article. Just not in the opening sentence; probably, not in the opening section as a whole, either. -The Gnome (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
• Yes to the infobox and the Career section. No to the lede. She is an accomplished attorney and there is no reason to exclude her professional affiliation.Bangabandhu (talk) 18:23, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
• No to both the lead and infobox, WP:WEIGHT. If the firm becomes independently notable in the future, inclusion could be discussed again. Throast (talk | contribs) 19:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

What, exactly, leads you to believe that Brown Rudnick isn't "independently notable"? Bangabandhu (talk) 02:58, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

• Yes, although it certainly doesn’t have to be phrased the same way it currently is (…best known for her work with the legal firm Brown Rudnick…) if that would make people happier. She is a practising attorney, and her current firm should be in the lead anyway, but the fact that she also currently works at the firm that no doubt helped her with that case is more reason to absolutely include the firm somewhere in the lead. — HTGS (talk) 20:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC) (Summoned by bot)
• No in lede, while yes she was working for Brown Rudnick, best known for it even in relation to the trial isn't warranted for lede. Leave for career section. WikiVirusC^(talk) 21:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
• No This information belongs in the Career section. It bogs down the upfront information needed in the lede and the infobox. -Sergeant Curious (talk)17:17, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
• No That detail belongs in the Career SectionWritethisway (talk) 20:02, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Boyfriend

Do we feel the need to mention her boyfriend and his name. I removed it previously due to it being a non notable person, and saying we typically reserve the mention for spouses and maybe engagements, but it was re-added so discussing here. From source I read they have been dating less than a year, and we don't need to track her dating life here. I don't think mentioning a boyfriend that isn't notable is needed at all. WikiVirusC^(talk) 13:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Keeps getting back in, with no discussion here. HurricaneHiggins (talk · contribs) I don't know if you saw this comment. To IP 72.136.95.67 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), I already asked to discuss on talk page in my edit comment so idk if you will even see this but as I said a husband would be worth mentioning, hence why Gloria Allred has it in her article. Adding/removing peoples current/former boyfriends/girlfriends isn't needed in a encyclopedia. WikiVirusC^(talk) 20:00, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

I am the one who added in the part about her dating Edward Owen - happy to have it removed or altered if you feel the name does not add the specifics. I typically add 'X is currently married to X, with whom X has X children. They live together in X". Depending on sourcing. Maybe we could state "Vasquez has a partner, Edward, with whom she lives in X"? @WikiVirusC I typically do not add to "celebrity" BLP or those that are currently trending in the news like this person, usually Aussie politicians. Let me know, happy to discuss! MaxnaCarter (talk) 23:46, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Married people are fine adding in. In this case they are just dating, if they were married, if they had children together, or maybe even engaged, I would agree with the mentioning of his name. Living together I wouldn't consider enough, but that doesn't matter in this case as they live in different countries. WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

@WikiVirusC I have no issues with this view. Happy to have my addition modified. MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good. Although it wasn't just you that has added it in, its been added in multiple times by others since and probably will again. I was hoping others would discuss it here. WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I think it's worth mentioning because of everyone's obsession with knowing whether she was actually having a fling with Johnny, so there's public interest there. Also, there are plenty of people who are in long and committed relationships that aren't married so I don't think that's necessarily a valid argument for taking it out. 72.136.95.67 (talk) 01:36, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

My particular issue is they are dating now, who knows what happens 5-10 years from now. Do we want to list every relationship and breakup she has from now until then. Are we just going to list each relationship as they are together and remove and replace as time goes on? I feel if the information isn't viable to remain in the article for the lifetime of the article it shouldn't be in there at all. A marriage whether the marriage last or not will always be a notable mention. I also have BLPPRIVACY concerns with naming non-notable people attached to her, as we are currently listing him and his place of work, and someone earlier today put in her apparent sister and work location as well. WikiVirusC^(talk) 01:50, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

That was me because I thought it might be relevant but I was fine with it being taken out... I mean I disagree with you because the media have gone out of their way to find out and report on her current boyfriend. If it changes in the future then go from there but she's still going to be in the public interest for the foreseeable future given Johnny still has to settle the demand for paying the ACLU's fees and the assault charges against him from the crew member of City of Lies. 72.136.95.67 (talk) 02:08, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I was partly motivated by the rumours about her dating with Depp. I considered whether to mention the rumour but decided it wasn’t fit for an encyclopaedia/was trashy/insufficiently sourced to do so. I did think having her relationship in silently addresses and quashed the rumour, but then we aren’t a truthful version of a tabloid, it’s an encyclopaedia so if others don’t think her relationship is relevant I’m happy to listen.

I’m enjoying this chat, I mostly add to Australian law articles and politicians that don’t attract much attention, nice to be collaborating rather than solo MaxnaCarta (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Birthplace

BBC says San Francisco, Marca says Los Angeles. Is there any confirmation from Vazquez or a source closer to her on which of the two claims is correct? IceWelder [✉] 11:27, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

There was some primary state birthrecord sourcing that I remove before that put her birth place in Alameda County which would be SF area . I'm not familiar with Spanish news site Marca, but I'm also not familiar with El Nuevo Herald who puts it in San Francisco. But I think we can use that as a RS. El Nuevo Herald is sister paper of Miami Herald, and also under McClatchy Company. That article also publishes her DOB which we don't have sourcing for, along with her parents name. Would prefer english version, but I think this should be good for birthplace/DOB/parents. WikiVirusC^(talk) 15:35, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

I've added in the reference for DOB, and added it next to BBC for birthplace and parents, that way we didn't have two conflicted references cited. Can still discuss if we think need additional confirmation, but figured would update since I found that. WikiVirusC^(talk) 15:53, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Someone changed it to July 24th so now I'm not sure which one it is... I've seen reports saying July 6th but maybe the person who made the edit actually knows her 72.136.95.67 (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Unless they have a WP:RS they shouldn't be changing it. July 6th is sourced and shouldn't be changed without a RS. Actually knowing someone is reason not to edit the article directly, not a reason to do so. I'm done reverting the article for the day, so someone else can fix it. WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:21, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I'll undo it. 72.136.95.67 (talk) 00:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I see you changed birthday back, but then you changed birthplace to somewhere unsourced? WikiVirusC^(talk) 00:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah whoops I thought Buena Park was her hometown but I think it's her current or recent address so I just put Los Angeles which I think is the most likely... 72.136.95.67 (talk) 01:22, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

This discussion was on this very point SF vs LA. BBC and Nuevo Herald cited sources say San Francisco, what is your reasoning for saying Los Angeles is most likely. WikiVirusC^(talk) 01:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I've seen Los Angeles on the majority of websites whereas I think that might be the only source that says San Francisco 72.136.95.67 (talk) 01:26, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Whatever I'll change it back lol 72.136.95.67 (talk) 01:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Well as I was saying, this is why we are here discussining it. Marca says LA, then BBC and Nuevo were two that said SF. If you have other WP:RS that say LA share them here. WikiVirusC^(talk) 01:32, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

This site says "Alameda County, California" Igge (talk) 17:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Sister

I thought it could be nice to mention her younger sister who is equally as amazing it seems, as a general pediatrician for Kaiser Permanente's West Los Angeles Medical Center in California, named Dr. Shari Vasquez Petito? (https://healthy.kaiserpermanente.org/southern-california/physicians/shari-directo-9357099) I thought it was interesting that she did her residency at Children's Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA) which Amber was supposed to donate half of her divorce settlement to... 72.136.95.67 (talk) 16:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Find a WP:RS for the family relationship, her place of employment isn't needed here as they aren't subject of article and they aren't a public figure. Residency connection could be mentioned if RSs cover it. WikiVirusC^(talk) 19:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

"her younger sister who is equally as amazing" what the hell is this? Wikipedia is WP:NOT a fan site! {{u|Gtoffoletto}}  ^talk 12:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Image

adding a picture of Miss Vasque would be great. 223.239.26.156 (talk) 09:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Clients

Leonardo di Caprio was not a client she represented, as quoted in the Oxford Union in a speech in 2023 Markpollock16 (talk) 19:23, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Could you provide a link to the source here? Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 19:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Talk has not been released yet, will post the link when it is available! Markpollock16 (talk) 14:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)