Jump to content

Talk:Jackie Collins

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

Cleanup

[edit]

This article needs some serious sorting out. It needs to be split up into secions (i.e. books, movies, personal life etc.) and quite a bit needs re-wording. A picture would be a worthwhile addition as well.... Ed 17:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to clean it up, including links to her books to be done later on as it would take time but some idiot reverted the page! Katana Geldar 12:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katana Geldar (talk • contribs)
I've just done a major clean-up as the article was reading too much like a juvenile fan page and some of the spelling and grammar was appalling. It could probably still do with a couple of tweaks here and there but please avoid information (especially third party comments) that cannot be validated, and remember to refer to the subject of any Wiki article by their surname as this is more encyclopedic.79.66.104.186 (talk) 14:19, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birth year

[edit]

Was Jackie born in 1937 or 1939? Hotwine8 03:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NY Times bestseller status

[edit]

Although only 24 of Ms Collins' 25 novels have been NY Times bestsellers in hardcover, in paperback all of her novels have been on the NY Times Bestseller list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.207.198 (talk) 05:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

British-American?

[edit]

Should Collins be described as British-American, purely because she became a naturalised US citizen? She was previously (ie, before her death) described as English, when I noticed it changed I found a quote from Collins describing herself as English. Anyone got a quote where she states that she is not English, but now British-American? Taking US citizenship doesn't make one American. Stating in the article that she took US citizenship is surely more correct. Citizenship and nationality are different things remember, and citizenship doesn't belong in the lead of an article.

2.98.142.247 (talk) 13:03, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1) Taking US citizenship doesn't make one American." -- false. Quis separabit? 13:13, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2) Collins was English, of course, but if a reputable source indicates she was also a naturalized US citizen, then as an encyclopaedia we must be scrupulously diligent, which I am. John Lennon, to whom you referred I assume (you only said "Lennon") was not a naturalized US citizen as far as I know, although Yoko Ono is, and her article reflects that. "where she has denounced herself being English" is ungrammatical nonsense. I am going to revert you once more. If you revert again you will be guilty of 3RR for which you can be blocked from editing privileges for a minimum of 31 hours as a newbie. SO STOP edit warring and edit in good faith and seek consensus. Quis separabit? 13:13, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you should be seeking consensus seeing as you are the one seeking the change? Instead of instantly reverting my edits back to yours, you should wait until more have made comment here. I am not the one edit warring.

Provide a reference that states Collins considered herself to be American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.142.247 (talk) 13:21, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2.98.142.247 (talk) 13:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if other editors take your side and a consensus emerges then I will abide by that. Fair?? However, as an apparent newbie editor, you should respect more seasoned editors and stop jumping to revert things drastically. Yes I know about BOLD but there is also BRD. Did you read all the recommended material that was suggested and highlighted in the welcome message you received on your talk page? I hope so. Quis separabit? 13:20, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, I believe consensus should be sought from changing a description that, from looking at the edit history, was in place for several years. As a seasoned editor, I find it astonishing instead of seeking consensus you are instead reporting me for edit warring.

2.98.142.247 (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I quite agree that taking US citizenship does indeed make you an American, however, people take citizenship for all sorts of reasons - convenience, technical or because they feel they belong to that country.--86.135.158.125 (talk) 16:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
She was born British and is a naturalized US citizen so she should be considered British-American - Kiraroshi1976 (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article has said she is an "English novelist" for the past several years, but now she's died suddenly she becomes a "British-American" novelist. It should say that she's British, and also that she was given American citizenship. Not this "British-American" rubbish that it's been changed to now that she's died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.249.197.35 (talk) 07:56, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the issue get back to WP Guidelines, such as for opening paragraphs? They seem fairly clear: this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable. So why the confusion?

The question also relates to how dates are formatted. The Guideline states: An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the English of that nation. As of now, she is described as an English novelist, although she lived and did all her work in the U.S. and became a U.S. citizen. Are WP guidelines for how notables are described in its encyclopedia being ignored or overruled? --Light show (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Date format: American or British?

[edit]

Considering that she moved to the U.S shortly out of high school, and the U.S. is where she wrote most of her works, the MOS section in MOS Dates makes it clear that using the American style would make more sense.

The MOS guidelines noted imply that where someone was born is irrelevant for notability purposes, or which national dating style to use. What counts is where she had her strongest national ties during her career. --Light show (talk) 21:36, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you missed my point, but whatever, as if my line of thinking were applied we'd get different date styles for DOB and DOD!--86.135.158.125 (talk) 09:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Both rationales are incorrect as explained above. --Light show (talk) 04:01, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. The explnations were clear and valid, whilst you have given no explanation.GeoffreySuchart (talk) 08:24, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all - please keep the stable version, which was DD/MM/YYYY, until consensus has been reached. Note, MM/DD/YYYY has only been imposed during the last 24 hours GeoffreySuchart (talk) 08:24, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

dot quote

[edit]

change using them as part of her "research." to using them as part of her "research".

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made..
"Periods and commas always go inside quotation marks." Per grammar book rule #3. --Light show (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: Per Light show's comment above. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 10:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jackie Collins. 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, 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) 11:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jackie Collins. 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, 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) 07:49, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jackie Collins. 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, 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) 08:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jackie_Collins&oldid=1194888345"