Talk:Elizabeth Morgan Act

Current name - is it helpful or necessary?
The article gives the current name of the child (now an adult) at the center of this dispute. I don't see any historic or encyclopedic value in that. The article is about the act named for her mother and its history. What does it add when we give the current name of the adult child? I see no value in it other than making it easier for people to track her down. I'm a proponent of knowledge for the sake of knowledge, but I think there is a valid counter-argument in this case. Dcs002 (talk) 09:31, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Read the article linked at note 3; it is obvious that the daughter is not hiding from but rather is seeking publicity.SHJohnson (talk) 17:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I've added slightly more detail to some of the sentences, to make a bit more even-handed. That includes making it clearer that the mother and daughter gave an interview to L.A. Weekly in 2009 and the daughter is/was openly involved in a musical career with that name.  Hope that helps with the above.  This article really got thrashed a few years ago; there are probably some things worth recovering in there, if they're sourced property. --Closeapple (talk) 23:14, 21 June 2015 (UTC)