Talk:Penélope Cruz/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Picture

Is it just me or does the picture this page offers of Cruz horrible? Its dark, you can't see her face, and it honestly could be anyone. Who the hell knows how to upload here? I don't, but I'd suggest a new pic of her!

You're right, it's not a good picture (indeed, we upscaled a bad picture, making it worse). Somewhere I have a DVD of Jamón, jamón... (yeah, you guys know what I mean) -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture with Kingsley

This is taken from shooting of the film "Elegy" and it isn't really appropriate to say she's out shopping with him.

22:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Improving the image

I'm still learning how to brighten up an image on Wikipedia. Some that look good on my machine turn out to be still too dark once uploaded. I'm going to replace the picture of Penelope Cruz with an adjusted version and see how it goes. --Chris 21:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, it's in place. Filename changed to "Cap001a.jpg". It's brighter, but not as bright as I'd prefer. (Maybe that matches the movie; I haven't seen it.) --Chris 21:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

• • The whole reason I went through the talk page delete/archive rigamarole below is because I wanted to add this comment! The drawing in the article is cool, but it would sure be nice to have an actual photograph that shows what she really looks like. I mean, she is known as a beauty. Seems like a picture would be helpful. --Dmz5 00:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Note that we may only use freely-licensed images to depict living people, though, so no film screenshots and no promotional images. --Yamla 00:48, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I found something on the internet, but it's so awful, that trust me, the drawing is better. -Patstuart^talk|edits 00:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

That drawing is so awful, any image is better than that! --Gunsfornuns 14:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Talk Cleanup

Immediate Cleanup of this page is required. Either archived for the sake of saving the work, but I can only find two secions regarding the picture and another subject are clean and follow any guidelines or serve a purpose. I do not maintain this page but this article needs immediate work. --OMG LAZERS 10:07, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, I removed it up. There's no point to litering the talk page with that. -Patstuart^talk|edits 00:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Aww I was just learning how to archive a talk page. I agree however that getting rid of it is the best option. --Dmz5 00:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Paragraph "Early Life" reads like it was made up - Kristina Kota Kochool (?) and the Conservatorio Nacional in Racine, Wisconsin???

If you read her bio, Penélope Cruz was born in Spain. She has lived almost her entire life in Europe. When do you suppose she would have moved to Racine, Wisconsin for five years? That whole paragraph reads like vandal heaven. The Conservatorio Nacional is in Spain. Kristina Kota Kochool (please see initials) ???? There is no such place and only shows up in sites that mirror Wikipedia. To the best of my knowledge, she has never lived in New York either which why that whole paragraph looks like it was dreamed up. Ronbo76 02:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The whole thing looked fishy to me, but the only part I could be sure was wrong was the part about Racine, Wisconsin. I live in Racine, Wisconsin, and there is no 'Conservatorio Nacional' here (nor has there ever been). I checked an early version of the article, and it had the Conservatorio in Madrid. I deleted the Racine reference, but left everything else, because I wasn't sure which parts were wrong. MayerG 02:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

A lot seems to be in the imdb article: [1]. I hope they didn't copy from us or from anyone who copied from us. Patstuart^talk|edits 02:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Friendship?

Why is the friendship between Penelope Cruz and Salma Hayek notable?

They are two of the top Hispanic female stars. They have acted together and share a deep friendship which is openly displayed by themselves in the media. Supposedly Hayek is working on other joint projects. Hope this helps. Ronbo76 18:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, someone just took it upon themselves to remove it anyway....Gotta love that. Abalu 04:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Abalu

Unsourced information

I recently did a large cleanup of this article, and sourced everything I could find (it was hitherto totally unsourced). However, I found a lot of the facts to be totally unsourceable except by one major site: An imdb.com bio. However, I'm willing to bet that they actually took a lot of the information from us. Does anyone think we should get rid of anything, or at least place {{fact}} tags that can't be unsourced outside of that side? I am of the opinion we should. Patstuart^talk·edits 22:14, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source, so feel free to remove the passages. This is about a living person, and while the information may or may not be controversial, it can be removed until someone finds a real source for the information. The Behnam 22:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Her true age??

Theres NO WAY on Earth that she was born in 1974....

I remember seeing videos of Spanish electropop group Mecano in early 1989 and she already dated one of the band members (dating a popstar at 14?) and appeared on video as a teen girl( but not soo juvenile, she looked like 17-18)

My guess is that Ms Cruz was really born in 1970-71 but as usual with most female stars she wants to remove years from her! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pikaia (talk • contribs) 20:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

I agree about her age being unrealistic

She has got to be older than this article claims. I've seen the video for La Fuerza Del Destino, released in 1988, and she definitely looks a lot older than 14. If you don't believe me, go see the video on YouTube. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.246.153.217 (talk) 01:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

i dot agree with her personal life thing it sounds made up —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.226.92 (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Penelope was really born in 1974 and did have a relationship with said popstar. This caused a stir in Spain at the time (in fact, she has a really bad reputation in Spain, but that's a different issue)

Language skills

I do not think Penelope is "fluent" in any language but Spanish (and perhaps French). She has said she learnt the scripts in Italian "by sounds" and her English is far from fluent!

I can assure you that she speaks Italian. She was one of the guest at the 57th San Remo Italian Music and it was impressive to see how easily she answered all the interview questions in Italian.--ant of A 17:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Personal Life

She had a relationship with Tom Cruise...can somebody write on this? thx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nao1163 (talk • contribs) 02:30, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

"Controversy"

The reference to the mascara commercial doesn't seem significant, and it's unsourced, so I'm removing. Gerardw (talk) 14:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC) Well, it keeps coming back, so I'll add a reference, at least. Gerardw (talk) 04:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Not Vegetarian

She's totally hot, but come on, third party info says she's been eating bacon and a burger, so uh, it ain't disputed, it's proven false. I am removing the tag until she asks me out. Or we get a source saying otherwise. Gatesofawesome! (talk) 23:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Religion

This article doesn't mention her or her family's religion. NNDB states that she is a Buddhist. Is that true, and if so, is she a convert to Buddhism? Is she from a Catholic family? Werdnawerdna (talk) 10:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Penélope Cruz was raised as a Catholic, but according to this 2000 interview, she still believes in God but doesn´t follow that religion anymore. The religion she most identifies with is Buddhism. [2]85.240.21.48 (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Academy Award

Are the Wiki geeks just WAITING by their computers for the Oscars to be announced just to have that pseudo-honor of being the first to update someone's Wiki bio page?

Oh please what does it matter?

Why doesn't somebody add "Academy Award-winning" before "Spanish actress" in the brief first sentence? It sounds better to refer to an actor's Oscar win in the *very first* sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.133.122 (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Or, maybe the handful of Goyas are considered more important to a Spanish actress? Kbthompson (talk) 23:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, putting awards in the lead sentence isn't congruent with MOS:FILM and WP:NPOV. She has a myriad of awards and putting them all in the lead sentence is impossible, while choosing the one that any given editor would pick is based on a point of view. It's in the lead, it does not need to be in the opening sentence. The opening sentence should only briefly cover who the person is and why they are notable. Penelope Cruz isn't notable because she won an award, she won an award because she is a notable actor. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I was being rhetorical, it was not a serious suggestion. Kbthompson (talk) 09:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I realize that, but I also thought that it was time to explain why. It's been a week-long battle to keep this out of the lead sentences of a lot of articles! Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:44, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Hispanic?

The last sentence of the first paragraph of the article refers to Cruz as being the second Hispanic actress to win an Oscar. The word Hispanic is incorrectly used here. Hispanic is not correctly used to refer to Spaniards (nor to Portuguese). The sentence should be edited to read, "She is Spain's first female Oscar winner and the second Spanish-surnamed actress since 1961." The word Hispanic is a vague and sloppy one used to refer to people of many different races, ethnicities and mixtures thereof. Accordingly, its use to describe the people of Spain (and Portugal) is not only incorrect, it is rightfully offensive to these peoples. I could not effect the correcting edit to the article -- perhaps someone else can do so? (unsigned comment added by 15:37, 23 April 2009 LarWiki (talk | contribs) name added, and moved for continuity, by Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

This change was made somewhat as desired a month later. I agree the term hispanic is very vague, but its used in this manner in the US, (its a federal govt term for statistical /demographic purposes)and may be important information for readers to know.Is this in fact improper use of the word? if so i wasnt aware. also, if there is significant popular opinion that she IS an hispanic actress, that can be noted, even if its incorrect. I would prefer that someone with better understanding of the nuances of this issue choose how to present this info. if no one else does anything, i will change it to the above suggested terminology. the reference link remains, i see.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

What's confounding this is the article used to source the sentence "She is Spain's first female Oscar winner." This article at guardian.co.uk uses the term "Hispanic" in relationship to those from Spain, including Rita Hayworth, and doesn't make a distinction between those of Spanish ancestry in the Americas and those of Spanish ancestry in Europe. I don't think it's entirely true that Hispanic isn't used to refer to those of Spanish ancestry. If one looks at the article on Wikipedia: "Hispanic is a term that historically denoted a relationship to the ancient Hispania (geographically coinciding with the Iberian Peninsula). During the modern era, it took on a more limited meaning, relating to the contemporary nation of Spain.

Still more recently, the term is used to describe the culture and people of countries formerly ruled by Spain, usually with a majority of the population having Spanish ancestry and speaking the Spanish language."

It also defines the word "Hispanic": Hispanic is used to refer to modern Spain, to the Spanish language, and to the Spanish-speaking nations of the Americas. (sourced to two dictionaries). I'm not sure removing that reference is valid. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

good points. i see the article standing as it is. lots of issues here, ill read more on the term.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:21, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Hispanic is a catch all term for anybody who comes from a spanish speaking origin is hispanic--Wikiscribe (talk) 03:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Race in the U.S. is based on self-identification (at least for most government statistical purposes). Does Ms. Cruz self-identify as "Hispanic"? --Nricardo (talk) 05:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

It continues to say she is the 6th Hispanic actor to win an Oscar... Americans, -and anglosaxons, perhaps- are the only ones who put Spaniards into this ethnic category. As if they were not Europeans... Spain is in Western Europe and it identifies with Western Europe values and culture, not Latin American. For many Spaniards, it is weird, aberrant and offensive to be considered put into this category. She is a European actress, just as Sophia Loren, Monica Bellucci or Marion Cotillard are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.148.70.238 (talk) 05:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The best word would be Spaniard plain and simple. If she were to speak in Spanish, she would mostly like say "Soy española" - I'm Spaniard. The problem most Americans have is that española is translated as Spanish which connotates the language which then begins the proverbial search for a race. I know all this because my Dad was Spanish. He wasn't European; he wasn't caucasian; and definitely don't call him Anglo-Saxon. While she might identify with being European, she most likely say she is Spaniard. Morenooso (talk) 05:29, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say that if your dad was spanish (from Spain), he was European. Take a look at European geography, history and culture. I did not call Spaniards anglosaxons. Please, read my post again. Spaniards are Caucasian, as any other European. I don't understand why the rest of the world has to follow a classification of races Americans have invented based on ignorance for the most part. She is a Spaniard and a European. French are French and European and Germans are Germans and European. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.148.70.238 (talk) 06:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I did read your post. And, I posted verbatim what my Dad said many times. The world looks for too many all inclusive labels. He would tell you to your face he wasn't European. Falling into the caucasian trap is another all inclusive try too. Let's respect what the top of this page says and not make this an "end all discussion" that should not take place on this page. Morenooso (talk) 06:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Please, can somebody with a bit of knowledge and sensitivity intervene here? Are people who don't know that Spain is in Europe writing an encyclopedia? What is this a joke? Things like this make Wikipedia look like trash. Please, be serious. Brazil is in South America, China is in Asia, Uganda in Africa and Spain in Europe. Do we have to start at this level? I can't believe it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.148.70.238 (talk) 06:27, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hispanic was never meant to be a racial classification and still isnt and never has been...no matter what people think when they use it...its origins are literaly from Latin..and using it donesnt make someone non-European...Just read the translation of the the wikipedia articles in Latin and see what you find...Spain is directed to Hispania, the Italians are Italic, the Portuguese Lusitanic and the British Britannic...those are the exact same words that would be used to describe other people..but are not used. All come from latin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.219.139 (talk) 04:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

883

im cleaning up the entry for number 883. it mentions a tattoo cruz had in 2001. here is the link: [3]. im not up on this, but if someone wants to add it that knows its still there go ahead. it doesnt belong on a disambig page if its not refd. ill leave the link on the article 883 (disambiguation), so please remove that link if you dont include this inarticle. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Name

They just said on the Academy Awards that her birth name was Agnes something. Not sure if it was a joke or not. 75.252.110.254 (talk) 01:46, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I believe it was a joke, and people are not understanding it very well; suggesting semi-protection. -Happy5214 (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Razzie awards

Nymf (talk · contribs) has reverted addition of the Razzie Award to the Filmography table and cites consensus at WP:ACTOR. While I could find discussion and consensus on removing navbox templates, I could not find any mention of discouraging their mention in filmographies, awards lists, or text of the article. Can you please cite the discussion that produced this consensus? Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 22:41, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Pirates of the Caribbean: At Stranger Tides & Monica Cruz

I find it very offensive that her sister Monica Cruz is not mentioned in this section, she is not mentioned at all in the article about Penelope. The physical body of Monica is captured multiple times in this movie, and whether the makers of this movie want to credit her for her work or not I find irrelevant to those who want her information removed. I find it further insulting that you do not reason your actions! Please respond! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.216.178 (talk) 00:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you have some reliable sources for these assertions? Jezhotwells (talk) 07:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Please check http://pirates.wikia.com/wiki/Angelica and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_Cruz for further information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.216.178 (talk) 18:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC) Here is another page confirming my claim about Mònica Cruz: http://www.popcrunch.com/monica-cruz-stunt-doubles-for-pregnant-penelope-cruz-on-set-of-pirates-of-the-caribbean/ I support the free text and contribution concepts of Wikipedia. Unless all three sources are seriously questioned (and please tell me why) I find no objection against Mònica Cruz being in the main article about her sister. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.216.178 (talk) 12:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

"Nero Fiddle"

In "Filmography" section, the movie "Nero Fiddle" should be renamed. The actual name is "To Rome With Love" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.55.36 (talk) 20:40, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Done Elizium23 (talk) 22:36, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Disorders

Didn't Penelope have any disorders? Like For example Obsessive compulsive disorder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.55.87 (talk) 19:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Penelope Cruz the oldest Bond girl

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Penelope Cruz in February this year announced that with her husband Javier Bardem (44) expecting a second child, and should soon be born. In April next year, will turn 40 and then play the Bond girl in the 24th sequel of the most famous secret agent in the world. Beautiful Spaniard will thus become the oldest Bond girl in the history of the popular film series. There is a 'flattering title' ever wore Honor Blackman (87) which is the 1962nd in the film 'Goldfinger' played Pussy Galore. She was then 39 years old. The new James Bond film will cost 100 million pounds, according to the Croatian daily 24 hours.78.2.69.140 (talk) 15:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Picture

What a horrible picture! It would be great if someone can change the main picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.3.136.164 (talk) 19:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

It's not that bad. --BwB (talk) 19:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia depends on freely licensed contributions from editors like yourself. Feel free to take your own photo and upload it here under a compatible Creative Commons license. Elizium23 (talk) 19:24, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

May I point out that we do have a new picture, taken by myself earlier this week: Image:Penélope Cruz TIFF 2012.jpg... Tabercil (talk) 05:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

It is kind of dark, but it is higher resolution; what exactly are the problems with the current photo? It seems alright to me. Elizium23 (talk) 17:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Just add it. I don't get why we need a discussion, since it's a more recent image and the quality is better. --37.104.175.228 (talk) 14:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

A discussion to establish consensus is highly recommended before changing an image in an infobox because the image should be of high quality, accurately represent the article subject, and as stable as possible, so that people are not confused when they reach the article multiple times. By all means, add more photos to the body of the article, that requires no discussion, just editorial discretion. It is good for Wikipedia articles to be well-illustrated. Changing the infobox image every three months accomplishes very little. Elizium23 (talk) 15:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree, the 2012 photo is much better. It's higher quality and more recent.JanderVK (talk) 09:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Personal Life

Explaining my edit, this section seemed to be oddly ordered. It started with insignificant detail and progressed to more significant detail which is more tabloid-like than encyclopedia-like. Likewise, the paragraph about her husband started with a mention of dating and then later gets around to the fact that they are married and have a family.

Lastly, there was a cited mention of her wanting to adopt children. As of this edit that is an eight-year old reference and she has given birth to two children since then so it doesn't seem appropriate to leave in place in a biography. Arbalest Mike (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Controversy?

What's is so controversial about standing up for those being slaughtered in a genocide by the IDF Zionists. This is fact not opinion. Judaism rejects Zionism and fascism. World Jewry is on the side of the Palestinians and P Cruz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:7:8500:982:D184:8B97:800F:74A6 (talk) 18:44, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

1. Wow. Wow. That “preceding unsigned comment” should probably be taken as a warning of what can happen if we fail to be WP:IMPARTIAL. Words fail me (which, conveniently, makes it easier to not feed the trolls).
2. But in the Real World, we have sources which report the subject of this BLP doing something which is legitimately controversial. A celebrity doing something controversial is hardly novel; we track the sourced information, give the event minor space on the BLP page, and move on. But here, an IP editor admitted to a personal bias against one word of that section of the article — essentially, “I just don't like it” — and then used that word as false justification to blank the section. (I call the justification “false” because removal of that one word by another editor since then didn't change the bias or the results.) Why is this different than any other POV vandalism? We revert the deletion and move on.

 Unician ∇  07:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

• Propose your text here with sources. Edit-warring will lead to blocking. I have semi-protected the article meantime. --John (talk) 10:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

e/c If we have sources, then they should be inserted, otherwise, a controversial section like that will be removed per WP:BLP -Roxy the dog (resonate) 10:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Just like that !!! -Roxy the dog (resonate) 10:13, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

John, no one is edit-warring, as per the article history. A previous editor claimed a particular word in the text as problematic, and the editor who had written that word retracted it. How about that compromise as a starting point? (compromise version here)  Unician ∇  20:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Nothing can be added here without proper sources. As I say, bring your proposals and your sources here. --John (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Without proper sources I agree with. Furthermore, I do not think it counts as a "controversy". All political opinions could essentially be considered controversial because all political opinions are bound to be contradicted by someone with an opposite political perspective. -Xcuref1endx (talk) 19:36, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Penélope Cruz. 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/20150619010819/http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/penelope-cruzs-father-dies/ar-AAbMHIQ to http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/penelope-cruzs-father-dies/ar-AAbMHIQ
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://mo.daytondailynews.com/movies/content/shared/movies/reviews/A/alltheprettyhorses.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/reviews/cl-et-volver3nov03%2C0%2C1743176.story

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 15:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Penélope Cruz. 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/20100107122942/http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2008/08/woman-on-top.php to http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2008/08/woman-on-top.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100112011400/http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/movies/trailers/documents/01228058.htm to http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/movies/trailers/documents/01228058.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725063430/http://www.daviddidonatello.it/english/cercavincitori3.php?idsoggetto=157&annovinci=2004 to http://www.daviddidonatello.it/english/cercavincitori3.php?idsoggetto=157&annovinci=2004
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130521184755/http://www.atlanticcityweekly.com/news-and-views/hot_millions-50660347.html to http://www.atlanticcityweekly.com/news-and-views/hot_millions-50660347.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091123062809/http://www.salon.com/entertainment/broken_embraces/index.html?story=%2Fent%2Fmovies%2Freview%2F2009%2F11%2F18%2Fbroken_embraces to http://www.salon.com/entertainment/broken_embraces/index.html?story=%2Fent%2Fmovies%2Freview%2F2009%2F11%2F18%2Fbroken_embraces
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110709184423/http://www.maxim.com/amg/girls/43960/2007-hot-100.html to http://www.maxim.com/amg/girls/43960/2007-hot-100.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090601235306/http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,627890,00.html to http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,627890,00.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:14, 1 December 2017 (UTC)