Talk:Connie Booth

message: Given that she hass acted mostly in Britain wouldnt it be more suitable to but a british actress stub thingy? --Aaronsharpe 01:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because that would be saying she is of British nationality, but she is American. Trampikey 08:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She is obviously American (you learn something new everyday) but I agree with Aaron on this, because of her career--MacRusgail 23:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Say she is a British Actress of American Birth
4.142.132.190 00:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Given that she has writing credits as late as 1999, can we get confirmation that she is actually a psychotherapist? 71.132.153.2 03:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the article needs to contain info on the education by which she became qualified. in the u.k.? u.s.? when? where? Toyokuni3 (talk) 22:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  the first above reference is a dead link, and the second is entirely inadequate, mentioning psychotherapy only in passing.i am tagging the statement for citation.Toyokuni3 (talk) 22:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps ‘psychologist’ is the better term? ‘Psychotherapist’ implies that Booth has a medical degree, but gaining that qualification would require more than five years of study. The references are merely to mentions in interviews, not evidence of accreditation.110.144.142.91 (talk) 23:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Psychotherapist - confirmed 

message: Link to a failed legal case she brought against her accountant in the USA - I assume it's the same lady -  --Shtove 10:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failed case 

message: So far I've seen different dates (december 2 and january 31st) as well as different years of birth (1944, 1942 and 1940). It would be nice if someone could find a reliable source for this info. 145.116.235.242 (talk) 05:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked Booth up at Companies House: she registered as a director for Lahr Enterprises Ltd in 2012 and gave 2/12/1940 as her date of birth. (And curiously still gave her profession as actress): 
* http://directors.findthecompany.co.uk/l/8042236/Ms-Connie-Booth (email registration required to see date)
* http://www.checkcompany.co.uk/director/5047071/MS-CONNIE-BOOTH
* https://www.companieslondon.com/uk/08135762/lahr-enterprises-limited
Crisso (talk) 04:23, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

text: You have obviously not read the policies that I have linked to. Your edit summaries are not a WP:RS nor are they WP:V. What is or is not required at that website has nothing to do with how info is stated here at Wikipedia. BTW your edits mean that there are 3 possible birth dates which is not helpful to the article. MarnetteD|Talk 18:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW the date you are adding is completely different from the one listed above which means CB or someone else changed it since 2016. This is why Wikipedia requires WP:SECONDARY sources rather than WP:PRIMARY (which is what Ms Booth is) ones. MarnetteD|Talk 18:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The date Richardlord50 last added is the same as the one I listed above in 2016. Unless you were misinterpreting 2/12/40 as 12th February 1940 (rather than the intended 2nd December 1940). Crisso (talk) 19:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Yikes  that is wild. Thanks for your continuing efforts in researching this. MarnetteD|Talk 20:24, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's always been advantageous for an actor to seem younger than they are unfortunately. I'd tend to think the divorce notification would be most accurate since they're briefed from legal documents and the industry sources more prone to making her age younger than actual. However, until we can get a true reliable source, this may be a case where it'll be a long time until we know. MartinezMD (talk) 22:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

text: If you log into ancestry.co.uk and look up Constance/Connie Booth Bollinger, you will find not only Booth's 2000 marriage record and her 1959 High School yearbook photo, but her actual birth certificate! Cross referencing the latter with the other two shows it is indeed Connie Booth, and that she really was born on December 2, 1940. Let's hope The Times or The Guardian take note of this and publish it in their birthdays for December 2nd, then we can finally include it in the article. Crisso (talk) 09:25, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most sources state 1940. It is likely that 2nd December 1940 is correct. The other dates and years are merely errors and speculation or incorrect/white lie answers to press interviews. It is unlikely she would have made a false declaration on legal/work related documents or on anything to or connected to Companies House. It's surely time to remove all of the speculative dates and leave it as 2nd December 1940. The current opening as it is looks a real mess and is hardly good presentation for an encyclopaedia. If it were someone born in 1840 I could understand the lack of clarity, but for someone born in 1940, the various years given are just ridiculous. OrangeFlavaFree (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The Glasgow Herald news article about her divorce (saying she was 38 in 1978) is the most convincing source - it lists a specific court and judge. I'm not yet firm in my own mind about the other sources for specific date in that time frame, but definitely the other years are errors or typical actors white lies about their ages. So I certainly would support the removal of the other years. MartinezMD (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is the consensus I would recommend still having a footnote that mentions there are other dates from various sources. It can be brief my hope is that it would prevent edit warring. MarnetteD|Talk 20:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good solution to me, for what it's worth. JezGrove (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think if we don't mention the other dates/sources future editors will re-include them or have renewed debate. I agree we should be preemptive. MartinezMD (talk) 21:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Someone may want to introduce a source for the 2 December 1940 DOB alongside the note. Anarchyte (talk • work) 14:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs to be added. Current source only is good for 1939/1940 year. MartinezMD (talk) 15:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If we mention a source in the note for the 1940 date does it matter if we don't use a secondary one? I know it's not ideal but I'm sure I've seen other articles where the birth date has been a source of contention where this has been done. Though I can't remember which ones offhand. Crisso (talk) 03:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Here is a screenshot of her previously discussed birth cert: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ConnieBoothBirth.png. Crisso (talk) 04:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Although that is likely hers, my cynical side says how do we know? Do we have reliable sources for the names of her parents? MartinezMD (talk) 06:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from the other two sources found at ancestry.co.uk that I mentioned in my comment on 3rd Sept 2019 (which I did not take screenshots of at the time and now am unable to due to current library closures) the only other official source I can find online which ties Connie Booth in with the birth certificate is the 2016 funerary notice of Conrad Booth Bollinger, "son of the late Elmer Edward and Virginia Caylor Bollinger" and later mentioned is "sister Constance Booth Lahr and her husband, John of London." Crisso (talk) 04:04, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: While it's likely correct, it's just not strong enough evidence without a Cleese name or saying they're actors, not even counting that the source itself is a funeral home obit as opposed to an official press announcement. It's WP:SYN at best, and a coincidence that would violate WP:BLP at worst. MartinezMD (talk) 04:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Managed to get into Ancestry as they are free over the Easter weekend and did find a record of her marriage to Cleese: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CleeseBoothMarriage.png. Though I agree it's still not sufficient. Unfortunately there don't seem to be any good secondary sources that confirm her birth name. Crisso (talk) 05:30, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately those pages on the BFI database have recently been removed. An archive version is now sourced here, unfortunately it's of the old version of the page, with the incorrect birth date, so now we are back where we were. Although after a quick glance, it appears all recent news articles in the press mentioning her are going with the right age (as per the 1940 date). Crisso (talk) 20:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we have it covered as best we can for now. We have the DOB we believe is most likely to be accurate and we have included a note about the several other sources with different dates. Until conclusive documents are available to the public, this is as good as it gets. MartinezMD (talk) 00:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of birth 

message: *moved from MarnetteD's talk page
I have read your comments on the Connie Booth article.The facts of her birthday can be verified PLEASE LOOK AT Companies house own website which she HERSELF has verified.Don't' you think she should KNOW HER own birthday you fool.Tell me who did put that information on Companies house website if not her.She is required by law to put any facts as accurate as possible the fact the birthday information is wrongRichardlord50 (talk) 18:08, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You have obviously not read the policies that I have linked to. Your edit summaries are not a WP:RS nor are they WP:V. What is or is not required at that website has nothing to do with how info is stated here at Wikipedia. BTW your edits mean that there are 3 possible birth dates which is not helpful to the article. MarnetteD|Talk 18:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW the date you are adding is completely different from the one listed above which means CB or someone else changed it since 2016. This is why Wikipedia requires WP:SECONDARY sources rather than WP:PRIMARY (which is what Ms Booth is) ones. MarnetteD|Talk 18:28, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The date Richardlord50 last added is the same as the one I listed above in 2016. Unless you were misinterpreting 2/12/40 as 12th February 1940 (rather than the intended 2nd December 1940). Crisso (talk) 19:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Yikes  that is wild. Thanks for your continuing efforts in researching this. MarnetteD|Talk 20:24, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's always been advantageous for an actor to seem younger than they are unfortunately. I'd tend to think the divorce notification would be most accurate since they're briefed from legal documents and the industry sources more prone to making her age younger than actual. However, until we can get a true reliable source, this may be a case where it'll be a long time until we know. MartinezMD (talk) 22:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

text: If you log into ancestry.co.uk and look up Constance/Connie Booth Bollinger, you will find not only Booth's 2000 marriage record and her 1959 High School yearbook photo, but her actual birth certificate! Cross referencing the latter with the other two shows it is indeed Connie Booth, and that she really was born on December 2, 1940. Let's hope The Times or The Guardian take note of this and publish it in their birthdays for December 2nd, then we can finally include it in the article. Crisso (talk) 09:25, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most sources state 1940. It is likely that 2nd December 1940 is correct. The other dates and years are merely errors and speculation or incorrect/white lie answers to press interviews. It is unlikely she would have made a false declaration on legal/work related documents or on anything to or connected to Companies House. It's surely time to remove all of the speculative dates and leave it as 2nd December 1940. The current opening as it is looks a real mess and is hardly good presentation for an encyclopaedia. If it were someone born in 1840 I could understand the lack of clarity, but for someone born in 1940, the various years given are just ridiculous. OrangeFlavaFree (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The Glasgow Herald news article about her divorce (saying she was 38 in 1978) is the most convincing source - it lists a specific court and judge. I'm not yet firm in my own mind about the other sources for specific date in that time frame, but definitely the other years are errors or typical actors white lies about their ages. So I certainly would support the removal of the other years. MartinezMD (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is the consensus I would recommend still having a footnote that mentions there are other dates from various sources. It can be brief my hope is that it would prevent edit warring. MarnetteD|Talk 20:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good solution to me, for what it's worth. JezGrove (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think if we don't mention the other dates/sources future editors will re-include them or have renewed debate. I agree we should be preemptive. MartinezMD (talk) 21:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Someone may want to introduce a source for the 2 December 1940 DOB alongside the note. Anarchyte (talk • work) 14:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs to be added. Current source only is good for 1939/1940 year. MartinezMD (talk) 15:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: If we mention a source in the note for the 1940 date does it matter if we don't use a secondary one? I know it's not ideal but I'm sure I've seen other articles where the birth date has been a source of contention where this has been done. Though I can't remember which ones offhand. Crisso (talk) 03:20, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Here is a screenshot of her previously discussed birth cert: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ConnieBoothBirth.png. Crisso (talk) 04:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Although that is likely hers, my cynical side says how do we know? Do we have reliable sources for the names of her parents? MartinezMD (talk) 06:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Aside from the other two sources found at ancestry.co.uk that I mentioned in my comment on 3rd Sept 2019 (which I did not take screenshots of at the time and now am unable to due to current library closures) the only other official source I can find online which ties Connie Booth in with the birth certificate is the 2016 funerary notice of Conrad Booth Bollinger, "son of the late Elmer Edward and Virginia Caylor Bollinger" and later mentioned is "sister Constance Booth Lahr and her husband, John of London." Crisso (talk) 04:04, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: While it's likely correct, it's just not strong enough evidence without a Cleese name or saying they're actors, not even counting that the source itself is a funeral home obit as opposed to an official press announcement. It's WP:SYN at best, and a coincidence that would violate WP:BLP at worst. MartinezMD (talk) 04:16, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Managed to get into Ancestry as they are free over the Easter weekend and did find a record of her marriage to Cleese: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CleeseBoothMarriage.png. Though I agree it's still not sufficient. Unfortunately there don't seem to be any good secondary sources that confirm her birth name. Crisso (talk) 05:30, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately those pages on the BFI database have recently been removed. An archive version is now sourced here, unfortunately it's of the old version of the page, with the incorrect birth date, so now we are back where we were. Although after a quick glance, it appears all recent news articles in the press mentioning her are going with the right age (as per the 1940 date). Crisso (talk) 20:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we have it covered as best we can for now. We have the DOB we believe is most likely to be accurate and we have included a note about the several other sources with different dates. Until conclusive documents are available to the public, this is as good as it gets. MartinezMD (talk) 00:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: 2018 edits

message: I don't think this is a photo of Connie Booth. Fairlightseven (talk) 15:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see the resemblance.  Wknight94 talk 16:07, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My first reaction to the photo was the same as Fairlightseven's. After looking at it more closely I think that Wknight94 is right. I would suggest that we try and find a picture that is a little more recent so that other readers who don't always look at a talk page won't have the same "is that really her" reaction. If one isn't available then so be it. My thanks ahead of time to any editors that look into this. MarnetteD | Talk 22:08, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo