Talk:Linda Purl

message: 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)
thread_title: Movies?

message: :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)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Purlmain.jpg

message: No info about why she left Matlock? I need juicy details. 76.102.46.144 (talk) 20:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Leaving Matlock 

message: 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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed the birth date, so I will respond to the request posted by : "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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Birth date of son