Talk:Patti Davis/Archives/2014

Untitled

Patti Davis is listed as the "half-sister of Michael Reagan." Michael was adopted by Ronald Reagan and his first wife; a step-sibling is the child of a stepparent, not the child of a parent. Michael Reagan, although not Ronald Reagan's biological son, is still legally his son; he is certainly not referred to as Maureen Reagan's stepbrother and is referred to as her brother, as he should be. Therefore, although Patti and Michael do not share genetic material, they do share a father legally, making Michael her half-brother. I am changing the article wording to reflect this. 72.186.143.34 08:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Why was the image taken away?

Request of image replacement. There are better photos of Patti Davis, and the Playboy cover depicts a man fondling her breasts. That is considered pornographic content, which seems inappropriate for encyclopedic standards. - Rcej 23:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the image. Wikipedia is not censored and images are judged by whether they improve an article by, for instance, illustrating information provided in the article. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 15:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Wherefore Davis?

Where'd the name Davis come from? - David Gerard (talk) 05:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

My guess is that she chose to use her mother's maiden name. I'll see if I can pin that down. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 07:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

This is the best I could find on short notice:

• Patti Davis is the name that Nancy's first-born chose for her profession as an actress and singer.
  • "America's new first family typical but not storybook", CHRISTOPHER REED. The Globe and Mail. Toronto, Ont.: Jan 20, 1981. pg. P.17

So we can say it's a stage anme, not a married name. But still nothing definitive on why she picked "Davis". ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Material removed

I have removed material from this article that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Troikoalogo (talk) 12:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

• She wrote accounts of her life that did not portray her family in a positive light, and an autobiography, The Way I See It, which contained the revelations that her father was cold, distant, and aloof to everyone except his wife. It also contained accusations of child abuse by her mother. Davis revealed that she had undergone sterilization so that she could not bear children, reasoning that this would stop the cycle of abuse.

The material is self-cited--obviously it's from the book. I'll restore it and add an inline citation if there's no objection. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 17:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

If you've checked the references that's fine. But please give an inline to the page numbers. We can't just stick a book in the references then assume any accusation in the text must be in the book - that leaves it open the possibility of people adding rubbish and no one knowing.--Troikoalogo (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you contesting the accuracy of this information? If so then the right way of handling it is to request a cite check. Since Davis' allegations were widely reported, these assertions aren't extraorinary. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I've no idea whether it is true or not. But negative information on a living subject requires explicit citation per WP:BLP. If we can reference the book properly, that's fine. But an individual wikipedian asserting "widely reported" doesn't really cut it. Can't any reliable sources be found? If its common knowledge that can't be hard. And I'm not sure that the "right way" of handling this is to request a cite check. Isn't it to immediately remove any negative material that does not have proper sourcing?--Troikoalogo (talk) 19:30, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

It is sourced, to the book. Page numbers are desirable, but the lack of them doens't mean the material isn't sourced. Deleting material with small defects in the citations, and posting a big notice that the material violates BLP, isn't helpful. It only takes a minute to check this kind of stuff on the Internet. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 19:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Asserting that a book contains very serious allegations of childabuse and sterilisation with no sourcing beyond that is unacceptable, and obviously open to abuse. It is always safer to remove such things - they can easily be replaced if someone wishes to source them later.--Troikoalogo (talk) 19:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Source on the book's contents: http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/18/patti.davis/index.html WilyD 20:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Good shot. That would seem to source some (although not all) of the allegations.--Troikoalogo (talk) 20:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Singer

Patti is also a very good singer. Back in the 70's she would sing in smaller club. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.239.202 (talk) 04:43, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Christine Reagan

Christine Reagan Should Be Listed In Patti Davis's Autobiography Because That Was Her Half - Sister And Michael Reagan Is Her Adopted Half - Brother, So Please Fix The Correction.Keri Nowling,Seymour,Indiana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.174.143.170 (talk) 00:12, 13 December 2011 (UTC)