Talk:Racquel Darrian/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
"Very subjective tone"???
Um... out of an extremely short article, User:71.244.86.178 cites one fragment, then slaps on the bias template and comments that the article has a "very subjective tone"? Wouldn't it have been a lot easier to just delete or modify the one word apparently in question ("shapely")? -EdgarAllanToe 21:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- What's more, the clause in question is not subjective, that is what she is best known for. Laszlo Panaflex 00:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Well...as nice and well known as her rear end might be, "shapely" qualifies as personal opinion.205.188.116.1101:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
As a matter of courtesy, if you are going to tag or template an article, try addressing your concern in the Discussion section first. If no one responds or rectifies the problem after a few days, go ahead with your tag and cite the Discussion. As often as not, as happened here, a minor change can be made that will satisfy the concerns. Laszlo Panaflex 18:57, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough, thanks. 71.244.86.17819:37, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
What's with all the slash and burning on this article??? You go back and there used to be much more info. So what if it wasn't sourced. This is PORN!!! The entry has become so minimal that it's almost useless at this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.69.248 (talk) 22:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
You can keep undoing but I'll keep undoing your edit. Her fans want to know what she's up to these days. Who made you the police nazi on this wiki??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.30.3.55 (talk) 00:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone keeps undoing what Racquel is doing now (working in collections/real estate). Her fans want to know. It's not like her history of escorting and drug abuse is being posted. Those aren't "cited" somewhere either but they're true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.30.3.55 (talk) 01:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)