Jump to content

Talk:Jon Foster

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jon Foster. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:05, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relative

[edit]

Why is it being brought up who's related to whom. Are the two editors (one who appears to be an admin) going to embark on a campaign similar to nepo-kids? It is very relevant to put in-laws in an article and it's done across the site. This relates to mentioning Laura Prepon.Infactinteresting (talk) 00:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sourced or not it is irrelevant to his article. It should be on his brothers article. He married her, not Jon. Mike Allen 01:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect. You're pulling this out of thin air. Look at all of the site and it bears out how erroneous you are.Infactinteresting (talk) 01:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's already in the infobox, and that's all that's needed. Take a look. Now stop telling far more experienced editors they're wrong. You're a newbie with a lot to learn. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:25, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]