Talk:Lori Singer/Archives/2013

Improving this article

I rewrote the article, to include some additional details of Lori Singer's film career and to improve the wording. I also took out a few links that I thought did not add value. This is still just a starter article, so if you feel you can improve and expand it further, you know what to do. Also, if some kind soul could upload and add an attractive photo of Ms. Singer that conforms to Wikipedia guidelines, that would be great. -- Mudwater 03:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Madonna

"Relatively unknown"? -she was known as one of the leads in "Fame", whereas at the time of casting the "Footloose" movie - which must have been in '83, Madonna would have been completely unknown.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Jewish

Neither of the sources supports the statement "her family is Jewish". Normally, I wouldn't mind the wording. However, in this case, it isn't totally correct, since I know that her mother (born Leslie Wright in Texas) is not of Jewish ancestry (although it is certainly possible that she converted to Judaism when she married Jacques Singer). I think the article should say something like "Singer is Jewish" or "Singer was raised Jewish". All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 14:31, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

So you're saying that Singer's mother was not born Jewish, so it would be better for the article to use different wording, and not to say "her family is Jewish"? Because the citations support that Singer is Jewish, but not necessarily her family? I guess that makes sense. What would be best of course would be if we could find a reliable source that gave us more information about all this. Barring that, perhaps "Singer is Jewish" would be a good way to word it for now. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 02:20, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll make the change. Yes, I wish there was a source that gave more details on her mother. The New York Post source I added a month back makes it clear that Singer herself was raised Jewish / is a practicing Jew (to whichever degree). (for the record, her mother's ancestry is documented here, but that's not a very reliable source). All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

The New York Post is not a reliable source of the "truth". How do you know she is Jewish? Was born Jewish? Or what religion her mother is? This is all ridiculous speculation, and what difference does it make anyway. Quoting the NY Post like it the source of all truth, is like quoting the National Enquirer. It is idiotic. Wikipedia is supposed to be about the truth, quoting gossip rags is not appropriate.User:Jamessmith50 2/27/2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. You didn't like that the Post reported she was divorced. Now you're here to dispute that she's Jewish. That's the sum of your editing so far. What is your issue here with Lori Singer/the Post? If you believe the Post is not a reliable source for these basic facts, please take it to the reliable sources noticeboard. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Each of the two points -- that Singer is Jewish, and that she's divorced from Richard Emery -- has a second reliable reference, in addition to the New York Post. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 03:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

How do you know she is Jewish? Because it is written in a newspaper? You are both ridiculous and bullying in your responses. And, what difference does it make what religion she is, or isn't? In addition, who cares who she's divorced from? How is any of that material to why she is here--she is an accomplished actress and musician. Wikipedia is not about conjecture or gossip. And what if Singer were Jewish yesterday, a Muslim today, and a Christian tomorrow? Isn't that her business, not yours? A person's religion is a personal matter, and should not be fodder for speculation. In addition, a person's religion and belief system may change or evolve. It is a private matter and does not belong on here. Furthermore, it is irrelevant. Those two "sources" citing her religion aren't particularly reliable anyway. Idle gossip is what it is, worthless. It may titillate the bored, small minded, and intolerant members of our society, but is does not enlighten or elevate anything, and in the end, it means nothing. User:Jamessmith50 2/27/2013 (UTC)

You'll find that on Wikipedia, articles about actors and other entertainers often include information about their personal lives, including their religious beliefs and who they are or used to be married to. I'm sure there are thousands of examples, but here are the first three that I thought of: Mel Gibson#Faith, Tom Cruise#Scientology, and Artie Shaw#Personal life. No disrespect to Ms. Singer is implied in any of this. "P.S." Being Jewish is not just a religious belief, it's an ethnic identity. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 01:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Several editors agree that her divorce and Judaism belong in the article and are reliably sourced. Unless you have a new argument or others who support you, I consider this matter resolved. (BTW: The "idle speculation" on her divorce cites the New York Times. If you would like to that the Times is not a reliable source, I again suggest that you take it to the reliable sources noticeboard. Be sure to let me know; I'd love to watch.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SummerPhD (talk • contribs) 03:01, 1 March 2013‎ (UTC)

Birth year?

1957? 1961? 1962?

For a long time, this article has identified her birth year as 1957. That's what IMDB says. A recent IP editor changed it to 1961, [1], which I reverted, [2] as apparent vandalism, and then undid my own change, [3], once I realized things were unclear.

The web is replete with sites saying 1957, and even a few recent news sources from usually reputable sites, in their "on this day" type columns, have indicated Singer as turning 54 on November 6, 2011, i.e., born in 1957: [4] (Boston Globe); [5] (NWI.com); [6] (UPI). On the other hand, I'd bet these are all just sourcing IMDB and potentially replicating its error.

The only traditional source I can find is Gale Biography in Context, usually a highly reliable source; and it says 1962. Gale is not freely online, but many libraries have it or other sources that can be accessed online by cardholders. I used the San Francisco Public Library's site to check. Based on Gale, I've used 1962, [7], but somewhat uneasily, given the above.

I can find nothing that says 1961, as proposed by the IP editor.

Anyone have anything more reliable than Gale? TJRC (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I seriously doubt the wire services are taking info from IMDb. Since you seem to have doubts about '"The Boston Globe, United Press International and the like, I'm citing the New York Times which gives 1957. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

For puff features like "born on this day"? I have no doubt that they use sources like IMDB; and likely Wikipedia. We're not talking real journalism there. I'm not convinced the NY Times piece you've added is much better. It's not really the New York Times, it's sourcing from allmovies.com, which is now allrovi.com, specifically this bit: [8]. I'm pretty sure when it was allmovies.com, it consisted of user-supplied info, just like IMDB. So I'm not sure we've got any good sources here. Mind you, given Gale's minority status, I'm not sure we can rely on that, either. I'm starting to think we have no reliable sources for her year of birth, and maybe ought to just omit it. TJRC (talk) 03:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it may be a "puff piece", but we're talking about three reliable sources that all agree. Puff piece or not, all three have a "reputation for fact checking and accuracy", as well as the likelihood that tacking 5 years onto an actress's age (in a youth obsessed culture) would be worth backing up with basic research. The wire service in particular is unlikely to be simply clicking through all the pages on IMDb. They carry thousands of stories to serve as sources. Do you really think they're pulling biographical data for their prepared obituaries? - SummerPhD (talk) 04:32, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The Texas Birth Register has her birthdate recorded as 6 November 1957, so that just about closes the discussion [9]. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 14:15, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Good; thanks for that. TJRC (talk) 19:00, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

We cannot use a primary source in a BLP. The NYTimes, etc. are reliable sources. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:32, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting using it as a reference. There was some doubt expressed above about the accuracy of our secondary sources but this primary source ends the doubt, so we can continue to rely on and quote those references ... as per Where primary-source material has been discussed by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to rely on it to augment the secondary source ....21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 11:45, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

First husband

A new single-purpose account has now twice removed well-sourced info on Singer's marriage and divorce. The second removal was unexplained. The first claimed "The information on her previous husband is irrelevant, and the prior poster is using gossip from the Post as a source. Her prior marriage is not newsworthy and not relevant to her accomplishments and why she is here (ie her film and music career)."

This article is a biography. Basic biographical info like this is standard. The source given is a New York Post article. While the Post tends toward screaming headlines, it is still a reliable source. Notably, the editor in question does not dispute that the marriage/divorce is true, instead claiming that it is "irrelevant". Comments? - SummerPhD (talk) 01:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree that basic info like marriages, divorces, and children is standard in Wikipedia biography articles, to it's appropriate to include it here. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 02:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)