Talk:Susan Penhaligon

message: :Image:Spenh.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 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 08:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Spenh.jpg

message: The article is currently a lot worse than it was. This version from 13 April 2013 is in my opinion the last correct version, but I don't know enough about the subject to place it back. Subsequent revisions have included unexplained removal of content and references by User:Susan penhaligon, who possibly has a WP:COI. I have now taken out all references called: "Susan Penhaligon", because that seems to be a clear violation of WP:OR to me. Mark in wiki (talk) 10:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely agree about the state, and the version you linked was an infinitely better article.  As it sits now, it's little more than a meandering list of production titles with little information about them (specifically, there is absolutely no information as to WHEN she appeared in any of these productions, how her performance was received, or how it all impacted her career and professional development).  In addition, all the titles were incorrectly formatted per WP:MOS (some were also incorrectly spelled, inaccurately phrased, or linked to irrelevant articles and disambig pages), and there were a number of floating sentence fragments, a general absence of punctuation, and incomprehensible gibberish and inaccuracies.  I've just done an overhaul, but it still has so little useful information that I move we revert to the version of 13-4-13. 12.233.147.42 (talk) 23:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article a lot worse than it was 

message: I made a change to the 'TV roles' section, showing a role with a definitive (early-ish) date in the subject's career. Penhaligon was a main-character in the episode, which was a contrived, retaliation-scenario against a middle-aged lothario, Julian Bradley, played by Ronald Lewis, where the younger girfriend (Penhaligon) of a middle-aged woman in a lesbian relationship was complicit in an attempt to embarass or discredit a well-known local character, as revenge for the sacking of a young female known to Penhaligon's character.The older woman purported to be the wife of Julian Bradley (Alison Bradley, Iris Russell's obit), suckering a private detective into investigating the situation based on a falsehood; the two females in the live-in relationship were described by a detective (played by Peter Childs) as "...a couple of Lezzies...", therefore it was an extensive, poignant plot considering it was 40+ years ago, which I merely mentioned in the prose. Thanks.--86.29.222.228 (talk) 17:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notice to Patrollers - Edit flagged up as "possible BLP issue or vandalism"