Talk:Michelle Rodriguez

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Biography     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia. WikiProject Texas (Rated Start-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. WikiProject Puerto Rico     (Rated Start-Class) Puerto Rico Portal Michelle Rodriguez is part of WikiProject Puerto Rico, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the people, history, language, and culture of Puerto Rico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help with the tasks listed below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Please do not substitute this template. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Puerto Rico To-do: edit Article requests: Art of Puerto Rico, Lourdes Chacón, Laws of Puerto Rico, Central Fajardo, El Verde more Cleanup: Mona, Puerto Rico, Vieques, Puerto Rico, Ponce Massacre, Morovis, Puerto Rico, Bayamón, Puerto Rico, Caguas, Puerto Rico Verify: Dominican illegal immigration to Puerto Rico, Biographic articles tagged with {{sources}} see List of Puerto Ricans. Puerto Rican Spanish Wikify: Expand: Public welfare in Puerto Rico, Culture of Puerto Rico, Demographics of Puerto Rico, Geology of Puerto Rico, Government of Puerto Rico, Education in Puerto Rico, Communications in Puerto Rico, Public housing in Puerto Rico, University of Puerto Rico more Merge: Category Sorting: Images needed: WikiProject Dominican Republic      (Rated Start-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Dominican Republic, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles related to Dominican Republic. For guidelines see the project page and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses (Rated Start-Class) This article is part of WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Jehovah's Witnesses. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This page falls within the scope of the Lost WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia articles relating to the 2004–2010 ABC television series Lost. Information on future episodes needs to follow the policy regarding sources.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of low-importance within Lost.

/Archive1

[edit] Legal Troubles

To clarify, in regards to the announcement of her release from jail, I had originally referenced her official website. Upon further investigation it seems that reference would soon become outdated as her website is updated. So I changed it to the most accurate article on the subject. It was perfectly fine as this but per usual, there are individuals who only edit after someone else edits just for spite's sake. The reality is the TMZ article is one of the only articles which states the accurate amount of days served (18, not 17) and even states the reasons why (California's minimum of 10% law), supported by official statements from the sheriff's department regarding the issue. It is the most in-depth and accurate article on the issue, and should be left.

Secondly, I edited the reference link regarding her blog about her arrest and conviction. In the future I think it's best to link directly to her blogs themselves rather than link to news sites which merely summarize her statements, often misquote, and somtimes even establish an outright bias towards them. It's best that wiki users are able to read the blog itself in it's entirity, rather than be told what it says amidst insults and conglomerated misquotations. LBear08 (talk) 13:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

TMZ.com is a blog. Blogs are not reliable sources. Reuters is one of the most respected news services out there. It is, quite clearly, a "reliable source" in every sense.

17 days vs 18 days is a technicality where a tiny partial day is counted for legal reasons, though virtually any person would say 17 days, the law counts it as 18. Your source, such as it is, explains this. Your edit did not.

I am restoring the Reuters source and wording to match. Your claims that the blog posting is "the most accurate article" and "one of the only articles which states the accurate amount of days" is moot. Wikipedia is about "verifiability, not truth." It seems odd to me to argue that a blog -- which presents a divergent reading -- is more of a reliable source that Reuters, et al. In any case, your text does not give the reasoning behind this divergent reading.

If you would like to expand upon the minor 17 vs. 18 day detail, I'd be more than happy to review your efforts.

Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Look, you are not Wiki admin, I don't have to check my edits by you first. You can't make a judgment opposite of what the state of California has said. She served 18 days, half days or not. That is a FACT that is not stated on Reuters. Find a new article from a "reliable source" (without any bias) that states she served 18 days and was released for overcrowding and I'll have no problem with it. Whatever reference used should reflect that fact. Find it and all is well. LBear08 (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I have not claimed that I am an admin or that you or "your friend" need to check your edits with me first.

I have claimed that a blog is not a reliable source.

Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I found an article myself that reflects 18 days and edited the reference. And it's from MSNBC. There ya go. Problem solved. LBear08 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to you (and your friend). - Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

There's more than one person out here (my friend who has no username included) who believes that truth and "verifiability" can and should go hand in hand. When you said "If you would like to expand upon the minor 17 vs. 18 day detail, I'd be more than happy to review your efforts." you are demanding I explain it to you before it is considered legitimate. That's not going to happen. Ever. Now, the problem has been solved so as you so often quote, let's focus on the content not eachother. Thanks. LBear08 (talk) 17:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

"I'd be more than happy to review your efforts." was certainly not meant to imply that you submit it to me prior to making the change to the article or that you need to explain it to me. As always, I will review any edits to this (and many other articles) to see if they conform to wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you and your various "friends" who edit nothing but this page and your talk page strive for verifiability and "truth", good for you. However, on wikipedia verifiability will always be the deciding factor. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 17:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

And in this case the truth was verified. So there we go. :) LBear08 (talk) 18:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

I have again reverted the edits to the Talk archive (restoring the original version), as discussed here. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The Archive, prior to refactoring, can be accessed here. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)