Talk:Kelly Rutherford

message: Giersch is born 1974. Rutherford has no sisters. Ann Edwards is not a model and not a writer. Rutherford is also friends with actress laurie Laughlin and producer peter winther
rutherfords middle name is not melissa. she currently stars in gossip girl.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.143.40.229 (talk) 10:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: She's quite easy on the eyes - but she's starred in two of my favorite series, Threat Matrix and E-Ring, which have both been canceled after the first season.
There's obviously a pattern here; this lady has bad karma! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.165.112.60 (talk) 08:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And Brisco County Jr, where she became my first masturbation fantasy. Is that notable? Should I put that in the main article? 68.102.171.147 (talk) 05:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  bad karma 

message: Can anyone verify these? The IMDB entry suggests 'Deane' not as an additional first name, and Melissa can't be found anywhere outside the Wikipedia. Both changes were introduced a while back, and at least one of the IPs looks like it did a whole lot of edits like this (at least some of which were reverted afterwards). --Kilessan (talk) 13:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In light of the other comment above corroborating my concern, I will remove 'Deane Melissa' for now. If anyone finds proof, we can re-include it. --Kilessan (talk) 13:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know I'm a bit late to the party, but in case it ever comes up again, Kelly Rutherford is a stage name.  Deane is her last name; Rutherford is her middle name.  Torven (talk) 23:06, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Deane Melissa" 

message: Here is just one of similar edits I've reverted that were neither neutral nor phrased in encyclopedic WP:TONE:
*Rutherford refused to abide by the ruling, instead filing a case in New York but on July 27, 2015....
Restored to
*Rutherford then filed a case in New York but on July 27, 2015....
We also don't need a synopsis of every single ruling in the case. WP:RECENTISM. --Tenebrae (talk) 18:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No "tone" intended – the phrasing reflects the referenced Vanity Fair and CNN articles.  Tone is probably something to watch for, as the Vanity Fair article also notes that social media has been rather pointed in their attacks on Rutherford, but that was not the intent of the edit.  One other item behind the edit... it was meant to set up the context for the upcoming (October 26 2015) hearing in Monaco that is expected to determine the next critical step in this part of the article.  That said, I agree that the edit was close to WP:RECENTISM, and should wait for the complete outcome of that hearing. Jmg38 (talk) 16:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate your collegiality, and I apologize if my tone in the edit summary was too sharp — I didn't see until after it posted that you're an experienced, longtime editor; I'm afraid I've often found redlink editors to be less than constructive, and that's clearly not true in your case. I respect your experience and your taking the long view here. With sincere regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 23:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: All good.  Jmg38 (talk) 18:47, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Partisan phrasing