Talk:Linda Purl

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.

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

Biography: Musicians

	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 Musicians.

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut 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.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Movies?

I'll add a section on movies, as that's a big gap. Better than nothing.KD Tries Again 18:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)KD[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Purlmain.jpg

Image:Purlmain.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:38, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving Matlock

No info about why she left Matlock? I need juicy details. 76.102.46.144 (talk) 20:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to Matlock (TV series) it was "due to disputes of character and castmates," but until that can be verified, it won't be added to her page (WP:BLP). --Musdan77 (talk) 03:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Linda Purl. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904194814/http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2009/09/01/office-exclusive-meet-pams-mom/ to http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2009/09/01/office-exclusive-meet-pams-mom/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date of son

I removed the birth date, so I will respond to the request posted by Tenebrae: "please go on talk page to reach consensus with other editors". My doing so was based on Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Birth date and place, which says, "Beyond the first paragraph of the lead section, birth and death details are not included after a name except in a case of special contextual relevance." Perhaps WP:BLPPRIVACY takes precedence. I don't know.

I won't revert the reinstatement. I was just trying to apply WP style as I understand it. If other editors want to discuss the topic further, I will stay out of it. Eddie Blick (talk) 02:38, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Teblick. That particular MOS section reads to me as referring only to the subject of the article. And you bring up a good point re: WP:BLPPRIVACY, the vagueness of which is proving increasingly controversial; some editors taking it as blanket prohibition on even mentioning children's names — something the policy does not, in fact, prohibit — while other editors, including professional journalists and biographers, fees names and birthdates already widely publicized in the press by the parents themselves are pertinent facts. At some point, I hope, BLPPRIVACY's vagueness will be replaced by clearer and more concrete directives than are there now. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]