Talk:Martine Croxall

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Martine Croxall. 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/20080907231440/http://www2.tv-ark.org.uk/presenters/c.html to http://www2.tv-ark.org.uk/presenters/c.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Acclaim section
The Acclaim section is completely over the top and is the same length as the rest of the whole page. At best it reads like a poor job application and at worst a hagiography. It was probably written by the subject herself as she has a long history of narcissism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.240.172 (talk) 17:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree that the section was over the top, though there's no need to disparage the article subject to make that point. I've merged the "Acclaim" section into the "Career" section and cut it down to a couple of sentences.  You could have done the same thing yourself, though the edit would have to have been approved as the page is under pending changes protection.  Best, Wham2001 (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

I was thinking about it but i didnt want a letter from her lawyers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.240.172 (talk) 14:15, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Glee
I've trimmed the section about Croxall being suspended. The additional quoting by User:Anvib was problematic. The original text, which Anvib dismissed as "speculation" came from the source ("It has not been made clear by Croxall or the BBC whether she was referring to Mr Johnson's withdrawal or to the fast-moving news agenda.") It was replaced by quoting more from the segment. The problem is the laughter was in response to another participant who was there to review the papers, whereas the quoting here makes it look like she's just giggling in her own gleefulness all by herself. I don't think adding even more quoting will help. It is merely 20s of TV and a blink within a long career.

Let's see how the investigation goes. This may end up being irrelevant. -- Colin°Talk 09:12, 29 October 2022 (UTC)