Talk:Rachel Dratch/Archive 1

Archive 1

See Talk:Rachel Dratch

Why merge

Wow, wow, wow, wow. Why should this page be merged with Recurring Saturday Night Live characters and sketches (listed by cast member)? The two pages are completely different. This is a biography of Rachel Dratch and the other is about the sketches of all cast members.- JustPhil 19:41, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree with JustPhil. There's no way these pages should be merged. Unless someone provides a reason why they should, I will remove the merge tag.--Alhutch 20:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Nope, I misunderstood. The proposal was to add the information on each cast member from the recurring characters section to each article on a saturday night live cast member. I support this proposal.--Alhutch 20:28, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, so it is intended to add the recurring characters of each actor to the actor's page. That is different.- JustPhil 00:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

One of the best moments

One of the best Rachel Dratch moments was the debut of the Debbie Downer character on a May 2004 broadcast of Saturday Night Live. It was considered a fan favorite due to the fact that none of her fellow cast members could make it through the skit without laughing at Debbie's depressing comments. By the end of the skit Jimmy Fallon, Amy Poehler, Dratch and guest host Lindsey Lohan were so far gone they were holding back tears.

Uh, this is a little POV, and not really written in an appropriate style.--ThreeAnswers 06:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Coming out?

Where is the proof of this? The official website doesn't say anything about it. SKS2K6 08:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Image

I've written to admin@rachel-dratch.com to ask them to release a better image. - brenneman 06:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Racheldratchdebbie.jpg

The image File:Racheldratchdebbie.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Fansite Link - please stop deleting it!

Why does somebody keep deleting my Rachel fansite link (under "external links")? I work really hard on this and do alot of research for fans. I've been doing the site for over 4 years now. I'd appreciate it if the link is kept in. Or at least give me a good reason why it cannot be there. I dont understand this, as I've had the link here for several years without any problems from anyone. All of a sudden, someone has taken it upon themselves to delete it everytime I edit it back in. Please dont do that, as I put alot of time and effort into the fansite. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisav429 (talk • contribs) 23:09, 19 July 2009 (UTC) #

Please read Wikipedia guidelines on External Links and guideline on conflict of interests. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 23:19, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, but why was it okay for several years and now all of a sudden it's not? Is this something new? I've had my link up here since at least 2006 and the only thing I was ever asked to change was to make it clear it's a fansite, which I complied to.

Thank you though for the response. I didnt realize this was ever a problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisav429 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You haven't provided any reason why the link to the fansite should remain. Wikipedia guidelines on External Links suggest that it should be avoided. And I'm afraid that just because it has been there for some time is not a valid reason for why it should remain. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:50, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

• Lisa, as commendable as the hard work is that you put into the fansite, take yourself out of Rachel Dratch, and imagine Bono, Madonna, Kanye West or Drew Barrymore. Some people have hundreds of fansites, and Wikipedia is not in a position to figure out which is "best" and links to fan sites aren't exactly what an encyclopedia does. We also aren't in the position to start listing every fan site to a person that exists in order to be fair to them all. An exception to this might be an "official fansite" or one sanction by the article subject (see Amy Sedaris and AmySedarisRocks.com). I have removed the fansite; that it's existed for a long time doesn't mean that it ever should have. Please stop adding it. Escape Orbit has already provided to you the appropriate guideline as to why this is the case. Thanks, and keep up the good work on your site. -->David Shankbone 15:07, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Why was the link allowed to stand for several years? Probably because Wikipedia wasn't as sensitive to biographical issues then as it is now. I can't speak to the quality or accuracy of your site, but fan sites often include inaccurate and information, subjective commentary, promotional material, etc., of the sort that isn't allowed in Wikipedia articles. As Wikipedia has become more concerned about the impact that its contents can have on people's lives, editors have been more ready to delete such material from articles -- and to remove links to sites that provide similar material. As more attention is paid to these issues, editors have been enforcing policy more strictly, and long-standing content (including links) has been removed. If you could show that your site is treated as reliable by third party sources -- for example, being cited in a substantive magazine article, or perhaps even being listed with approval on the subject's official site -- you might be able to make a case for including it. But if that is the case, you'd be prudent to make your case here and get consensus before adding the link back. Very few self-published sites (fansites or otherwise) qualify. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

New image

The current image for her is best described as horrifying. Can we get another one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.92.51 (talk) 02:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid that's just how she looks. I actually came to this page to see if she had some form of progeria or something. A lot of comedians are funny-looking! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 22:58, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

There are many pictures of her that are more flattering than this one. I hope we can get use of one. DFS (talk) 05:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I should have known that this is a Shankbone joint. He has a knack for snapping his shutter at the most inopportune times when a celebrity is making a strange expression. He also has a propensity to use an unflattering flash angle, hence the oily skin look and deer-in-the-headlights eyes. 198.203.175.175 (talk) 13:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

It's an interesting critique you made. While I love Rachel Dratch, she isn't known for being photogenic[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Those are all images taken by people who were paid for them. Or here's a few from the same event: [9]. I guess you could say mine is far worse than those, but I think equally valid is that mine is as good, or better, than those. You're entitled to your opinion - I'm certainly not saying every photo I have ever taken is gold, that's for sure. Regardless, it would be great if we could get her to release a publicity shot. Thanks for the note. --David Shankbone 14:42, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe one where she doesn't also look naked? I prefer [10]? DFS (talk) 20:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

She looks terrible in the image. As editors, we can remove the image based on our personal preferences if we really feel it disparages the woman and based on it being so poor that it not only detracts from the article, but misrepresents the subject (that is meant to read complimentary towards the subject). I think media is a great benefit to articles but this one just isn't the best. I actually enjoy the uploader's other work so please do not take offense (it isn't your fault that light and genetics team up unfavorably). Cptnono (talk) 04:28, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

30 Rock

It's surprising that this article doesn't mention her initial casting (and then replacement by Jane Krakowski) as Jenna DeCarlo (later Maroney) in "30 Rock". It's probably the highest-profile event in her professional life for the past five years; surely it's relevant? 220.239.203.179 (talk) 05:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)