Talk:Isabel Lucas

message: There's no way she was just in 59 episodes? Can this be double-checked? It should be multiples of that number.
She was in the series for years.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.46.200.76 (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: H&A episode total

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Isabel Lucas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120314192815/http://www.nbcf.org.au/content/upload/files/resources/2004-2005.pdf to http://www.nbcf.org.au/content/upload/files/resources/2004-2005.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090102011847/http://www.worldvision.com.au:80/media/ambassador.asp?id=5 to http://www.worldvision.com.au/media/ambassador.asp?id=5
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090325224717/http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/48999FB39FF74B14CA2570E60009FA68/$File/M2030+bulletin+Spring+2005.pdf to http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/48999FB39FF74B14CA2570E60009FA68/$File/M2030+bulletin+Spring+2005.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150601025525/http://www.savethewhalesagain.com/japanese_boycott.html to http://www.savethewhalesagain.com/japanese_boycott.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Isabel Lucas. 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  tag to http://isabellucasinspired.org/press/news.php?newsid=28
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090831235503/http://men.style.com/details/features/landing?id=content_9357 to http://men.style.com/details/features/landing?id=content_9357
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080114173910/http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=334504 to http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=334504
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120129053552/http://www.seashepherd.org/australia/isabel-lucas-psa.html to http://www.seashepherd.org/australia/isabel-lucas-psa.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Isabel Lucas. 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/20120321034549/http://www.petaasiapacific.com/featureSexiestVegCeleb2010-Eng.asp to http://www.petaasiapacific.com/featureSexiestVegCeleb2010-Eng.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:28, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Please check the odd "Bibliography:Contributors" section and subsection, which contains a single entry formatted as a citation to a work authored by the title subject. If the work is consulted, it should appear as a reference. If it is a part of her corpus of written work, then the section is mis-titled and the work is mis-presented. I would suggest incorporating this into a standard WP article structure, rather than confusing the reader with this novelty.
Finally, The article appears to be "fanzine" in emphasis, and almost entirely laudatory, and so the article scope and sourcing are to a degree suspect. I would pick several end of paragraph and end of sentence citations, and see if all content in the apparently supported unit of text is indeed supported. I have repeatedly found in this type of article that the articles drift toward non-encyclopedic, as content is added without source, often via insertion so as to maintain the appearance that all is well. Cheers.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:C700:7DAE:D528:67FF:4B7D:B3FE (talk) 06:16, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Regular editors

message: Whilst there is immediate evidence of her being against 5G rollout by way of her Instagram, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that she's explicitly anti-vaccine nor an activist of such measures. The only "evidence" is the headline by Who Magazine themselves. The intro needs to be revised or compounded with evidence if this is the case. Whilst anti 5G/anti vax circles overlap, they should still be considered distinct.
ItsBozzie (talk) 12:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, not just the headline. The article itself says it. What would you accept as evidence? If you say "a statement by herself", then you should read WP:SOURCE and WP:PRIMARY, and you will find that your preferences are vastly different from those of Wikipedia. --Hob Gadling (talk) 15:35, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

text: I have removed the categories as non-defining per WP:COPDEF and WP:OPINIONCAT. This person's primary notability stems from being is an actress and model. Holding beliefs (be they vegetarianism or anti-vaccine stances), or even speaking them aloud does not immediately make one an activist, especially for the sake of categorization that should be based on defining characteristics, not crusades to save the world by naming and shaming everyone who has publicly opposed a vaccine or mentioned 5G or Flat Earth or the Bermuda Triangle in some form or another. Per WP:COPDEF, "not everything a celebrity does after becoming famous warrants categorization."  --Animalparty! (talk) 03:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evidence for anti-vaccine activism