Talk:Linda Fiorentino

Bot report : Found duplicate references !
In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :) DumZiBoT (talk) 15:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * "filmr" :
 * Linda Fiorentino Biography (1960?-)
 * Linda Fiorentino Biography (1960?-)

Anthony Pellicano script
I removed the small section regarding the arrest of Fiorentino's boyfriend for a couple of reasons. The first is that it was sourced from the New York Post, which really isn't considered that reliable of a source, it is sensationalistic, and qualifies as a tabloid. The other is that the allegation that the event happened in order to assist Fiorentino was based, in one NY Post article, on the word of an anonymous source and essentially is presented as gossip. The other article said the information was given to a mystery woman. The content to this article takes it a step further and states it as verified fact. The NY Post may feel the freedom to insinuate things that open them up to possible slander and libel, but Wikipedia has WP:BLP which is more stringent in regards to connecting this as fact to Fiorentino and it's my view that the section violated BLP. Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The New York Post is not a reliable source? News to me.  How did you think the rest of us would learn this?  FWIW Howard Kurtz, the Washington Post's Media Consultant felt the NY Post was worth quoting.


 * The Washington Post and fox news also reported on this incident. Geo Swan (talk) 01:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The Howard Kurtz link is a blog/commentary column. What he commented on was the article in the New York Post, he didn't endorse or report it as fact. Content that falls in the area of the Washington Post printing that the New York Post said doesn't make it the epitome of reliable sourcing. There have been multiple discussions about the New York Post and other similar tabloid newspapers and almost to a point, each recommends a more reliable source than the tabloid, especially in the case of WP:BLP. I'm not sure what your second question is asking. How would the rest of the world hear of the allegation that the boyfriend stole the files to benefit Fiorentino? Perhaps widespread reporting by multiple reliable sources, beyond the point of printing "According to the New York Post." Beyond that, as I said, the statement added to this article didn't equivocate on the issue. It went from insinuating that Fiorentino was a recipient to simply saying that she was and that is inaccurate even if the Post was the Wall Street Journal. Again, my issue is that this is a WP:BLP issue and under that policy, questionable content and dubious sources for a BLP must come out. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It is a mistake to discount some sources, like Kurtz's as a blog. Newspapers are having trouble figuring out how to cope with the internet, and the surprising popularity of some original style blogs -- the unsubstantiated rambling of unqualified, random joes and jills.  Kurtz is a seasoned, experienced high-profile journalist.  Without regard to whether his column is called a "blog" it has nothing in common with the unsubstantiated unqualified ramblings you would be correct to discount.


 * I asked you to point to the discussion(s) where a consensus was reached that the New York Post should not be considered a reliable source. No offense, but your response has been hand-waving.  You provided no pointers to those discussions.  Forgive me for pointing that a responsible reader has to bear in mind the unsubstantiated nature of your claim that a consensus has been reached to discount the NYP.  Geo Swan (talk) 23:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Here is a small example of the lack of credibility of the New York Post - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/18/new-york-post-chimp-carto_n_167841.html Publishing a cartoon that likens President Obama to a monkey. If you need further evidence, that's an interesting position. Read the NYP reaction to the criticism - dismissal and cynicism. Ern Malleyscrub (talk) 13:45, 30 May 2012 (UTC) justinfleming 810

Birthdate
Below are three sources for her correct birthdate, March 9th 1958. The already cited "Beaver County Times" article, people.com and tvguide.com. And yet after all this the incorrect 1960 date continues to be displayed on Linda Fiorentino's wikipedia page. This is precisely why people continue to view wikipedia as a unreliable source of information.

184.78.168.124 (talk) 07:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

You wrote: "IMDb is not a reliable source for most things. It is clearly not reliable for biographical info on a living person. See Wikipedia:Citing IMDb for details." There is no mention here of imdb being "clearly not reliable for biographical info on a living person." In fact wikipedia often cites imdb for biographical information (examples of birthdates see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Gallo, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Sizemore)

Again, Linda Fiorentino's imdb biographical information is authorized by her or her representatives.

You wrote: "If you feel one of the sources currently in use is not reliable, please explain how the source does not meet the requirements spelled out at WP:IRS." I did, including the fact the filmreference.com citation actually lists both the 1960 and 1958 dates and yet it is used as a source for the 1960 date only.

By the way, the third citation already used as a source is a newspaper article from 2000 that lists her age as 42!!! Wikipedia had the correct birthday under its nose the whole time! Gaul, Lou (April 23, 2000). "Actress tries to remain unforgettable". The Beaver County Times. Retrieved October 4, 2013.

Note: I am providing you with two more sources used often and considered reliable by wikipedia -

1) People.com, here it is: http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20090809,00.html From Linda Fiorentino's May 27, 1985 interview it lists her age as 27 (also note John Byrum's age as 38 in the 4th paragraph.)

2) And TV Guide (also widely used as a reliable source by wikipedia) http://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/linda-fiorentino/bio/162240/

184.78.168.124 (talk) 12:11, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

i disagree she was not born on march 9, 1960 she was born on march 9, 1958 13 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinfleming810 (talk • contribs) 02:23, March 14, 2014‎
 * The 1960 date in the article is sourced. Do you feel those sources are not reliable? In what way? Do you have reliable sources for the 1958 date? - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 03:34, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * March 9, 1960 remains with reliable sources.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Linda_Fiorentino&oldid=611368696] Justinfleming810 is now blocked indefinitely for repeated addition of a different date without citing a reliable source. I have just reverted a change based on IMDb, whish is not a reliable source for biographical info. If anyone has a reliable source for a different date, we will likely need to include both dates (unless there is something wrong with the present sources). Otherwise, March 9, 1960 seems to be it. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 11:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Linda Fiorentino's birthdate really is 1958. The 1960 birthdate is sourced from tribute.ca (I didn't think that would be considered a reliable source) and from http://www.filmreference.com. Filmreference.com does list both 1960 and 1958 and also displays the 1960 date with a question mark after it. So I think its reasonable to say that the filmreference.com source could be cited as a reason for wikipedia to include both dates.

Also, http://viaf.org/viaf/56810743/ lists both dates as does the world catalog http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-no96-019110/.

Upi.com, which I understand is a reliable source, lists her birthdate as being 1958. http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2015/03/09/UPI-Almanac-for-Monday-March-9-2015/1441423773997/ (second paragraph)

Originally, I did cite http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Fiorentino as a source for the 1958 date, but it looks like en.wikipedia.org does not consider fr.wikipedia.org to be a reliable source.

Also, a note on imdb (imdb is cited as a source all the time on wikipedia, I dont understand why you say it cant be used as a source.) I understand that imdb sometimes has issues with the accuracy of some of the information it publishes online. Yes, this is due to the fact that anyone can *propose* changes/edits to any of it's listings. Much in the same way as wikipedia, imdb strives to verify all edits in order to maintain the most accurate information on their site. However, I would point out that Linda Fiorentino's listing has been claimed by her or her representatives, as is the case with almost all major living stars. Imdb Pro lists her entry as claimed and thus controlled by her or her authorized reps. I believe this is strong evidence that the birthdate listed on her official imdb entry is accurate and reliable.

Thanks for paying attention to what the world considers pointless minutia! I appreciate your hard work! 184.78.168.124 (talk) 02:57, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * IMDb is not a reliable source for most things. It is clearly not reliable for biographical info on a living person. See Citing IMDb for details.
 * If you feel one of the sources currently in use is not reliable, please explain how the source does not meet the requirements spelled out at WP:IRS. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * (This new comment was moved from the beginning of the section, per WP:TALK.)
 * Below are three sources for her correct birthdate, March 9th 1958. The already cited "Beaver County Times" article, people.com and tvguide.com.
 * And yet after all this the incorrect 1960 date continues to be displayed on Linda Fiorentino's wikipedia page. This is precisely why people continue to view wikipedia as a unreliable source of information.
 * 184.78.168.124 (talk) 07:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Please be sure to add new comments to the end/bottom of discussions, per our convention. Comments added to the top of existing discussions and edits to existing comments (as you have been doing) are easily missed, which seems to be the case here.
 * On the talk page, you have mentioned several sources:
 * worldcat.org - As you said, this gives two years (1958 and 1960 - more on this later), but no date.
 * UPI - Gives March 9, 1958. (Some editors reject "On this day..." sources -- even from UPI and AP. I'm not one of them.
 * French Wikipedia - As a user edited site, Wikipedia and similar projects are not reliable sources. Imagine Wikipedia has the wrong date and fr.wikipedia has the right date but neither one has a source. One changes their date, citing the other, which then adds a citation to the one copying it. Now they both have the right date or both have the wrong date and both are apparently sourced. Ugh.
 * IMDb - Similar reasoning to fr.wikipedia applies here. Yes, submissions at IMDb are "reviewed". However, IMDb is not particularly clear about what that means. For all we know, they are accepting info from us. Yes, IMDb is often cited on Wikipedia. In general terms, some material is clearly reliable, most editors will accept it for something non-controversial (credits on widely released films, for example) and other material is not acceptable. Citing IMDb gives an overview. Controversial material about living people (as the birth date here seems to be, with various sources giving differing dates) is not acceptable. Yes, you will find articles that use inappropriate sourcing. As this is the "encyclopedia anyone can edit", there is always something that needs to be cleaned up. WP:WAX explains some of the consequences of this.
 * filmreference.com - Gives March 9, 1960, with a note that some sources say 1958. However, WikiProject Film/Resources and Reliable sources/Noticeboard both reject this as a source, for lack of editorial oversight.
 * tribute.ca - Says March 9, 1960. Tribute (magazine) seems to be reliable.
 * People - Gives her age as 27 on May 27, 1985. This implies she was born sometime between May 28, 1957 and May 26, 1959. People is reliable. If we had nothing else, we could provide the range.
 * TV Guide] - Give March 9, 1958. TV Guide is reliable.
 * A few other sites:
 * The New York Times - Gives March 9, 1960.
 * Fandango - Gives March 9, 1960.
 * Rotten Tomatoes - Gives March 9, without a year.
 * The New York Times - Gives March 9, 1960.
 * Fandango - Gives March 9, 1960.
 * Rotten Tomatoes - Gives March 9, without a year.

We actually run across this kind of thing often enough. For whatever reason, we run across disputed birth years for actresses fairly often (cf. Michelle Thomas, Sharon Leal, etc.). We have reliable sources for more than one date, so -- IMO -- we should include both. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 13:33, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, if her interview in People magazine doesn't settle this (and it should - as it also lists Byrum's age correctly,) then at least include both dates. The Beaver Times source is ALREADY being used in the article, why not also use it for her birthday??? ("Actress tries to remain unforgettable". The Beaver County Times. Retrieved October 4, 2013.) 184.78.168.124 (talk) 02:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The reason the People article doesn't settle this is twofold. 1) It does not give a birth date. It gives her age as of the date of the article, implying a range of possible dates. (the Beaver County Times article is similar). 2) We have no reason to believe it is more likely to be correct than other reliable sources that directly state dates that conflict with what it says.
 * Given the sources outlined above, we have several sources we can safely ignore (basically, those that give or imply ranges) based on the fact that equally reliable sources are more direct. We have UPI and TV Guide giving March 9, 1958. We have Tribute, the New York Times and Fandango giving March 9, 1960. I'll add both dates, citing TV Guide and NYT. I remain open to other ideas. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 11:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I see that someone has edited the birthdate to read 1960. I'm almost positive 1958 is correct.  She graduated from high school in 1976, when she would have been 16 or 18, depending on whether 1958 or 1960 is correct for the birth year.  I've never read anything indicating she graduated from high school at 16, so I assume 18 (and 1958) are correct.


 * In addition, I recall seeing somewhere a public listing of voters in her Connecticut hometown, which indicated 1958. That would seem to be authoritative.  I'll see if I can find that source, and if so I'll update the article to read 1958.
 * Billmckern (talk) 12:27, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I have restored the sourced dates, as discussed above. If you find additional sources (being wary of WP:BLPPRIMARY), please bring them here. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:01, 10 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I updated the birthdate to 1958. I believe the 1958 birthdate on the voter registration I cited, coupled with the 1976 high school graduation (most people graduate at 18) answers the question.


 * Billmckern (talk) 07:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * We cannot use voter registration records, per WP:BLPPRIMARY. A yearbook is not a reliable source and synthesis based on an unreliable source is certainly no better. Please see the new topic at the end of this page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

end of career
The claim that her career lasted "1984–2002, 2009" keeps popping up in the infobox. You need a source specifically stating her career is over. You need a source specifically supporting her career was ended/inactive through 2003-2008. The mere fact there are no projects featuring her is not enough. CapnZapp (talk) 13:32, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Birthdate, redux
Currently, we have two sourced birthdates. TV Guide, a reliable source, gives March 9, 1958. BFI, also a reliable source, gives March 9, 1960.

Previous attempts to support one over the other have failed. If you have something new, please discuss it here.

Previous discussions have used filmreference. com, voter registration records and a high school yearbook. The first, filmreference. com, is now blacklisted on Wikipedia as an unreliakble source, so no help there.

Voter registration info from government records cannot be used for info on a living person, per WP:BLPPRIMARY.

A high school yearbook being used based on the assumption that the subject would have been 18 upon graduation is problematic in numerous ways. Most importantly: a yearbook will not meet WP:IRS and -- as it does not give a birthdate directly -- the assumption based on the graduation date is original research.

If you have something additional, please bring it here. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 20:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm out.


 * Billmckern (talk) 13:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


 * - How about newspaper articles from 1985, before Vision Quest came out? The articles I found indicate that studio executives and the film's producers couldn't find her when it was time to do the publicity tour for the film. And they uniformly give her age as 23, meaning a 1958 birth date.  That would mean she wasn't born in 1960, and it would have been before she became famous and had an incentive to shave two years off her age.


 * Billmckern (talk) 10:42, 27 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't get your pings. You have to use my full username.


 * I can't judge sources I can't see. You'll need to give cites.


 * From what you are saying, though, your math isn't making sense. Sources "from 1985", that "give her age as 23" do not mean a 1958 birth date. They would imply a birth date of 1961 or 1962.


 * Please do not imply anyone lied about a birth date. This page is subject to WP:BLP. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 20:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Pellicano
As discussed above, an IP editor has been reverted twice for unexplained removal of law enforcement's claim that the subject had a previous relationship with Pellicano. While I have no direct knowledge relating to this, I can confidently say that it is reliably sourced. "At the time he conducted those illegal searches, Rossini was dating the actress Linda Fiorentino, known for her role in "The Last Seduction." Fiorentino had a previous relationship with Pellicano and wanted to help him, law enforcement officials have said."

I welcome comments, corrections and suggestions. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 20:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

even if you are using the Del Quentin Wilbur article as a source ( fiorentino was never contacted my wilbur) the article does not state that Fiorentino had a romantic relaitonship or that he was her prior boyfriend which is what someone keeps posting on the page. TENEBRAE seems to be the person most obessesed with posting the disinformation even though the article does not say that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda Fiorentino Really (talk • contribs) 17:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The "Del Wuentin Wilbur" source cited in the article says:

"Fiorentino had a previous relationship with Pellicano and wanted to help him, law enforcement officials have said."


 * Citing that source, we say "Law enforcement officials said Fiorentino previously had a relationship with Pellicano and wanted to assist his defense".


 * I can't really see how you can be claiming it doesn't say what it clearly and directly says. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:36, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to be accurate, User:SummerPhDv2.0, we also say ...a failed effort to help her earlier boyfriend.... Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Linda Fiorentino Really: Here are additional sources clearly substantiating the relationship between Fiorentino and Pellicano:, ,. CapnZapp (talk) 17:47, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * At this stage, I don't think it is useful for you to claim all these sources are flat-out wrong. We trust Washington Post and other mainstream media here on Wikipedia, and as long as they claim she was in a relationship with Pellicano, we will say so. My constructive advice, User:Linda Fiorentino Really, is to accept this and stop wholesale removal of sourced content. What you can do, however, is (at least when the page protection elapses) edit the phrases used to describe their relationship. Regards, CapnZapp (talk) 17:57, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Please also keep tabs on the Rossini and Fiorentino section of the Anthony Pellicano article. Thanks CapnZapp (talk) 17:52, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2019
change section regarding ANTHONY PELLICANO. Source material is false. Fiorentino had no prior relationship with pellicano.VEn if you use the source material disinformation in the washington post article cited, the article does not state that Pellicano was her boyfriend or there was a romantic involvment. TENEBRAE has been obsessively reporting this disinfroamtion and should be exiled from wikipedia for harrassment. Linda Fiorentino Really (talk) 16:58, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The Washington post is a reliable source and it is being quoted accurately:


 * At the time he conducted those illegal searches, Rossini was dating the actress Linda Fiorentino, known for her role in "The Last Seduction." Fiorentino had a previous relationship with Pellicano and wanted to help him, law enforcement officials have said.


 * That is why it has been changed back. Lard Almighty (talk) 17:20, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


 * ❌. Please establish a consensus before making an edit request to remove reliably sourced material.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 17:32, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2019
remove the words "prior boyfriend" from the Pellicano section. The Del Quentin article you cite does not claim that nor is it inferred. It is sexist to conclude and state as a fact that the prior realionship Del Quentin WIlber refers to is romantic in nature. 71.190.248.143 (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I have removed "prior boyfriend" as the sources do not say that. The remaining text does say "prior relationship", so that remains.


 * Your previous efforts generally removed the entire section, sometimes removing a good bit of additional content without explanation.


 * On several occasions, you said there was no past relationship at all, though the sources state that law enforcement said there was a past relationship (which is what our article says).


 * You've made most of these edits anonymously under various IPs, sometimes saying that you have removed incorrect info and we should not re-add it. Why would we trust a random, anonymous person's word over the reliable sources?


 * At another point, you said you were a "family member" and we should show "respect". Now you are saying you are the subject or maybe not.


 * Incidentally, this is a legal threat. Please see No legal threats. Additionally, we do not "exile" anyone from Wikipedia.


 * The section in question no longer says "former boyfriend". Is there anything in the article that you feel is not sourced? Are there any sources that you feel do not meet the criteria outlined at WP:IRS? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:14, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Yearbooks - primary or secondary?
Please see WT:NOR. Thx CapnZapp (talk) 13:31, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Rossini's Sentence?
"Rossini pleaded guilty to illegally accessing FBI computers during the prosecution of Pellicano."

And what was his sentence? The Article leaves you hanging, begging for it, and suspecting he didn't get one.2603:8081:3A00:414A:9052:4CD9:1D83:B573 (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)