Talk:Girl with a One-Track Mind
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
I've added the above template as the name of the author, Zoe Margolis, redirects here. The above should be taken to apply to her rather than the book or blog - David Gerard 15:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Advance
editI don't actually think the author has made any "claim" about how much she received. "Six figures" is press speculation. She has explicitly stated on the blog that despite many people's assumptions, the book has not made her rich.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.216.109.65 (talk)
Speculation
editI've removed unsourced speculation about the allegation that Margolis' "outing" was part of a PR campaign, which fails WP:V. --Richardrj talk email 10:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- I have removed the speculation again, it had been re-instated by User:Disreputable whose sole contributions to Wikipedia have been to add this tin-foil hat theory to this entry. --Stalfur 10:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- In fairness, he had tried to provide sources for it this time, but I agree with you that it is still speculation (the opinions of one person on a discussion forum - big deal!) and quite unsuitable for an encyclopedia. BTW, you also (perhaps unintentionally) removed a couple of good references, so I've reinstated those. --Richardrj talk email 11:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- That might well have been my sole contribution to date, but everyone has to start somewhere. I'm sure you'd rather that newcomers stick to drooling, fanboy contributions like yours, but some of us have functioning critical faculties. Before I leave you boys to your games, one question: why do you assume that I'm a man, Richard? --Disreputable
- You sound like a wonderful addition to Wikipedia... I believe other websites are more interested in these kind of accusations, both on the subject and those who try to NOT base Wikipedia information on someones ruminations on a forum somewhere. Just the facts m'am. --Stalfur 12:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Umm, there is nothing in this article that is "drooling" or "fanboy". Believe me, I am well aware of the need to keep out such material and will take it out if it appears. The article as it currently stands is entirely neutral and factual. And I don't assume you're a man. I referred to you as "he" because I believe that the singular they is grammatically incorrect. The word "he" has historically referred to both genders, and as far as I'm concerned it can continue to do so. --Richardrj talk email 13:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- You sound like a wonderful addition to Wikipedia... I believe other websites are more interested in these kind of accusations, both on the subject and those who try to NOT base Wikipedia information on someones ruminations on a forum somewhere. Just the facts m'am. --Stalfur 12:56, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- That might well have been my sole contribution to date, but everyone has to start somewhere. I'm sure you'd rather that newcomers stick to drooling, fanboy contributions like yours, but some of us have functioning critical faculties. Before I leave you boys to your games, one question: why do you assume that I'm a man, Richard? --Disreputable
- In fairness, he had tried to provide sources for it this time, but I agree with you that it is still speculation (the opinions of one person on a discussion forum - big deal!) and quite unsuitable for an encyclopedia. BTW, you also (perhaps unintentionally) removed a couple of good references, so I've reinstated those. --Richardrj talk email 11:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Young woman?
editBorn 1972 and young? Is this not stretching it somewhat? Even "youngish" would be to plead the case. No need to call her a mature woman. "Woman" would suffice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.191.147.226 (talk) 10:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
- Agree, she's not young - she's 41 this year.Tirailleur (talk) 13:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Girl with a One-Track Mind. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070115135606/http://comment.independent.co.uk:80/commentators/article1218814.ece to http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article1218814.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)