Talk:Zoe Telford

Requested Changes to InfoBox

The format was not based on Bbb23's suggestion, but from someone who said the sources can be cleaned up Jack.D.Tipper (talk)Jack.D.Tipper — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack.D.Tipper (talk • contribs) 02:39, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Name: Zoe Clara Telford
Birthday: June 1973
Birthplace: Norwich, Norfolk (Ibid)
Current Residence: Oxfordshire, UK
Education: Italia Conti Academy of Theatre Arts
Parents: Allan & Leila Telford
Children: 2
Awards: Edinburgh International Film Festival
Best Performance in a British Feature Film - Special Commendation
Greyhawk (2014)

Picture: http://www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/5aa2667a82090406718ce4a0edd7404bd8884728.jpg

also, the picture used in my edited version is a publicity still and copyrighted by Kudos Film Limited. The Fair Use doctrine covers its use for educational purpose. Nevertheless, I did send them a Tweet to ask for permission.

I just want to be able to complete her update Zoe Telford's page without fear of retribution from admins.

Thanks. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 04:53, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I forgot to sign again Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 04:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Jack.D.Tipper

I can't say anything about the pic, this has to be commented by someone with experience in this field.

You should merge identical sources. To do this you name the reference when you use it first like this:
Current Residence: Oxfordshire, UK <ref name="norfolkmag">{{cite web|url=https://www.norfolkmag.co.uk/people/celebrity-interviews/home-is-where-the-heart-is-1-4131558|title=Home is where the heart is|author=Natalie Denton|date=6 July 2015|publisher=Norfolkmag|accessdate=9 August 2019}}</ref>
Everytime you use the same citation again you use a shortened version, like this:
Children: 2 <ref name="norfolkmag" />
Wp will then combine them in the reference list.

also move the ref for the father directly behind his name.

The rest looks okay to me.

Gehenna1510 (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Gehenna. I was researching how to cite using a shortened version, with not much luck. I will not publish a picture until I get the ok from the production company who owns the copyright. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 16:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

You cannot use freebmd.org.uk. It is an unreliable genealogy website. That means that none of the material supported by that website can be included. As for the picture, you'd have to upload it and I can't imagine the BBC would license it for use at Wikipedia. The picture you've already uploaded at Commons has no proof of licensing and will be automatically deleted on August 14 if none is provided.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

The FreeBMD.org.uk information is supported by information from paid searches, which obviously I cannot cite here. Also, the items from BMD are supported by scanned images as backups. What is considered a reliable source to you? Honest question. An actual birth certificate? That may be illegal. And I will find a picture that I can use that will beyond reproach. Thank you. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 20:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Jack.D.Tipper

What is a reliable source on WP depends on context, policy is at WP:RS. WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources may also be of interest. For a persons birthdate: Leave it out is an option, it's not mandatory. Birth certificate? No, see WP:BLPPRIMARY. What would probably work is, say, a BBC-article that mentions birthdate, or something covered by WP:ABOUTSELF, which includes stuff like FB and twitter. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:30, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

The UK Register Office refers users to FreeBMD as an online source. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

The UK Register Office refers users to FreeBMD as an online source. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 21:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Also, please see FreeBMD - it is a legitimate and reliable source. Thanks. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 22:04, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Jack.D.Tipper

WP:RS does not list FreeBMD as a good or bad source and the discussions surrounding it are inconclusive. . The reason why I am updating Telford’s page is that there is not much out there abou Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 22:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

... about her, and a bio of a person is incomplete without a date of birth. In her case, her birthplace and year are already known and her name is quite unique. So the probability that she is the person FreeBMD says she is is very high. I respect her need for privacy and will not disclose more specific info, but I’m trying to balance it with her public persona. Thank you all. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 22:54, 10 August 2019 (UTC) Jack.d.tipper

Huh? You said you were a fan. Yet, your statement above implies that you know Telford. Which is it? Regardless, you can't used that source no matter what you say (over and over).--Bbb23 (talk) 23:23, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

No I do not know her. Is it against the rules to ask you not reply to my posts, Bbb23? I feel your disdain and hostility towards me and I don't feel comfortable engaging with you. Thank you. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2019 (UTC)Jack.d.tipper

If you are having to argue "In her case, her birthplace and year are already known and her name is quite unique. So the probability that she is the person FreeBMD says she is is very high", you've already proven to use that the source you are trying to use is not an RS. For a high quality source, we would not need to engage in WP:OR to decide whether it's referring to the same person. In any case, as has already been pointed out to you WP:BLPPRIMARY and WP:BLPPRIVACY require high quality secondary source. Clearly from what you yourself have said, there is no way in hell that FreeBMD meets the requirement for: "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public". Note that in case there is still any doubt, a birth certificate is definitely not what we want. What we want are high quality secondary sources like the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent etc mentioning her birth date. Failing that, a clear mention on her personal website or on a Facebook account or Twitter account clearly belonging to her may be okay. Also for we do not allow non free photographs of living people simply to show what they look like except when it's not reasonably possible to photograph the person. I.E. you may be able to make the case for someone in long term seclusion or imprisonment who never makes public appearance, but not for an actress who by your own admission is active and so likely to be seen in public as part of her work. This means publicity photographs etc cannot be used unless they have been explicitly released under a suitable free licence. You're welcome to try getting someone to release a photograph under a suitable licence and sometimes it happens but often it doesn't even for publicity photographs. Probably in part because they don't understand our free content goal but perhaps also because the holder of the copyright may be fine with the photograph being used in a newspaper article or encyclopaedia article but not necessary all the other uses free licence would allow (subject to non copyright restrictions) like commercial t-shirts, mugs, paintings, or in attack ads etc. Nil Einne (talk) 05:55, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

BTW, this sort of thing [1] is the sort of promotional content which annoys many of us wikipedians. If you are adding things like "One of the more recognizable faces in British television" and name dropping highly notable actors who were in the same show as the subject of this article, you should expect significant push back even if you are just a fan. Frankly, while it's understandable why you may be interested in updating this article, if you really don't see the problem with what you were trying to add it may be better if you refrain from editing this article and instead get some experience elsewhere with the norms and expectations of wikipedia articles. Nil Einne (talk) 07:04, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

I swear I do not have any relationship nor do I know Ms. Telford personally. My statement "about respecting her privacy" is just that - respecting her privacy. Please remove the notation as it does Ms. Telford a great disservice. Also, the assertion that I know her personally is not consistent with the verdict that I should not use FreeBMD. I am begging you, please remove that statement because it is purely not true. Not for me - I'm just another bloke - but for the subject of this BLP who definitely has not done anything for self promotion. Thank you

Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I regret ever having started editing this article. The Wikipedia ecosystem does not feel safe to me - most people simply point out your mistakes but do not help you get it right. There is not a lot of article on Ms. Telford and she does not have any social media - hence my inference that she values her privacy. But to infer from that honest statement that I am somehow related to her is a gross mischaracterization and again, SIMPLY INCORRECT. It is not fair to her just because a nosy stranger wanted to know more about her. Please remove the notation. Thank you Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

I was deleted the assertion that the subject has "close connection" to "a contributor." It is a categorically false statement. Thank you. Jack.D.Tipper (talk) 19:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Off-topic, but I liked her in Absolute Power. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)