Talk:Mavis Leno

message: :Image:Story.mavis.leno.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 20:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Story.mavis.leno.jpg

message: A quick Yahoo search revealed several potential references that could be cited. I will add them when I have a chance, but I need to review proceedures for properly adding sources, footnotes, etc. first.
A few possibilities:
http://www.keynotespeakers.com/speaker_detail.php?speakerid=4777
http://www.voicesinc.com/Pages/mavis_leno.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989372,00.html
--Susan118 (talk) 16:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As a first stab, you can paste them in as http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,989372,00.html, for example. To make it look a bit nicer you can put them in a "citation template": . Thanks for all the help editing this article. Plastikspork (talk) 18:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, I'll work from those examples, thank you!--Susan118 (talk) 20:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I notice someone has placed a tag questioning the notability of the subject of the article. If she was only "famous" for being the wife of Jay Leno, I would agree, particularly as she is rarely in the public eye. However, her work as chair of a feminist group, and the fact that she has been working to restore women's rights in areas ruled by the Taliban since before most people had even heard of them, makes her notable in her own right. Unfortunately since she does tend to stay out of the public eye, it is more difficult to find a lot of information on her.--Susan118 (talk) 17:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the tag.  You should feel free to do the same if you see it tagged again.  If someone wants to seriously challenge this, they can issue a PROD or nominated it on AFD.  However, given the citation density, and the breadth of the citations, I would say that it's not an issue.  As you stated, she is more than just the husband of Jay Leno. Plastikspork (talk) 20:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Don't you guys think it's funny that her name is "Mavis"?  It is SO 19th century!  From all I have heard about her, she is a real doll! But, "Mavis"?!?!?! Come on!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.138.33 (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: The wording "They have been married since 1980 and have no children" is (1) correct, and (2) does not imply that children are an expected outcome of marriage.  If you feel as though the "and" should be changed to "but", please discuss here before changing it from the long-standing wording.  Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:37, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording 

message: Many outlets are reporting that she has Alzheimer's disease, including the Los Angeles Times, but all seem to trace back to TMZ, which has a warning message at WP:RSP. Mapsax (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The LA Times article mentions TMZ first reported it, but cites court documents. So it sounds to me like the LA Times at least got its information from court documents. There doesn't appear to be anything of substance to add, the only particular detail mentioned is "a doctor’s report from November, filed as part of the court proceedings, said she suffered with impairments to her memory, ability to concentrate and use of reason." That seems like a private health matter, not something for an encyclopedia. I removed the update tag because there doesn't seem to be an update needed based on information available in reliable sources. --Here2rewrite (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alzheimer's