Talk:Natasha Kaplinsky

A spell working for the BBC
She was credited as "Production Secretary" on the BBC production "Ronnie Barker: A Life In Comedy" in 1997, so clearly there's a spell working for the BBC around that time which isn't yet mentioned in the article. --Q4 11:12, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Education details
Modified her early education details which were slightly inaccurate. (I went to school with her, so take it from me). Saiing 08:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Award

 * In October 2004 she won the prestigious C.H.E.B award...

Which is what, exactly? And who or what is C.H.E.B? Some explanation would be nice! 86.132.143.81 05:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * A GOOGLE search only shows a match on the quote from Wiki which suggests that it can't be all that prestigious. I would suggest the comment is removed unless someone can give me more information.  --jmb 15:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Father
Her dad once briefly appeared on BBC news as part of a piece on flight disruption, is this worth mentioning? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinUK (talk • contribs) 12:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Probably not. Also the link to article about her father does not bring up an article - it should be de-linked. Wilmot1 12:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 23:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

She can't be Jewish
I saw her program Who do you think you are?. In that film her father was a jew and her mother wasn't. To be a jew your mother has to be a jew. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.54.149 (talk) 07:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps more to the point (with all due respect to Rabbinical law), she doesn't seem to consider herself Jewish either, being quoted as saying "With a Jewish father, even though we're not a Jewish family" in this article. Personally I don't quite "get" the zeal that Wikipedia has for these ethnic-group-with-nothing-to-do-with-notability categories in the first place, but at any rate this one doesn't seem to be applicable.  (Obviously someone will now go off and create ...)  Alai 00:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * And it's back. No indication as to why, of course:  will re-remove.  Alai 07:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


 * But we are talking about her backround and not about her religion, so that she is by her backround, and there is no reason to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.229.136.217 (talk) 17:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I said nothing about religion: her "background" does not make her self-define as a Jew, or qualify her as a Jew by the generally accepted criteria.  Have some other definition in mind?  Will re--re-remove.  Alai 20:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * But she is still jewish by race, and thats what should matter, and i can even source that if you want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.229.136.217 (talk) 20:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * "Race", indeed? I'd prefer you to stop, but if that's not an option, then yes, please provide a source.  Alai 21:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Done so. What i have learned with wikipedia is that if there are any disputes than i am suposed to source them and discuss them ,and that is exactly what i am doing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.229.98.206 (talk) 15:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That's a good philosophy, but you haven't sourced the point being argued. She clearly has a Jewish father.  She clearly isn't "a Jew".  Just reverting all the while while not even speaking to this point isn't helping.  Alai 00:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * She is only half jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.230.110.112 (talk) 15:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Which isn't the category you're repeatedly adding this article to. You seem to be repeating yourself, not answering the points raised, and continuously reverting regardless, which quite frankly is is getting quite tiresome.  Do you plan on keeping this up until the page gets (semi-)protected?  Alai 15:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * So how do we sort that one out i we don't seem to agree? and don't plan on keeping anything up but we need to sort out this and sharon osbourne once and for all, and i don't mind stoping just that frankly i ain't got no clue how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.230.110.112 (talk) 16:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Hold on, we need to sort it out not just keep taking the page in and out the category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.230.110.112 (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Look, i think we should both stop, once we have sorted out our differences, all we need to do is discuss it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.130.99.85 (talk) 17:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Since an unanswered argument has been made that she's not Jewish by the three most well-known bases for deciding such things (and likewise for Sharon Osbourne), I suggest that it's incumbent on you to either a) stop adding the category against evident consensus and said argument, or b) at the very least actually answer the point put to you. Alai 17:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Since you're neither stopping nor meaningfully discussing anything, that does seem a bit rich. Alai 17:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, that was four additions of the category in the space of four hours, with no supporting argument for doing so at all (other than "she has a Jewish father", which sustainedly misses the point). I've semi-protected the page for a week, and I'll drop a note at WP:ANI/3RR. Alai 19:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Personal life
I find it amazing that, in light of her move to Channel5, the sequence of events that brought her to public prominence - her appearance on Strictly Come Dancing, break up of her long term relationship, and reported affair with her dance partner with whom she then wins Strictly - is still being edited out. When every news report of her move to five mentions she won Strictly and had a reported affair, why do we have to leave it out when the references all include it? I have again re-added it, but I am sure some puritanical will be along soon to remove it and "clean" up her image - Ho Hum! Rgds, - Trident13 10:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree with the above, censorship at its finest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.175.31.173 (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Natasha Kaplinsky .jpg
Image:Natasha Kaplinsky .jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 01:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Actress?
Why is one of her occupations given as "actress"? She does not seem to have had any drama training and not appeared in any plays or films. --jmb (talk) 17:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Her height
Several anon IPs (which I am guessing are related) have added details of her height over the past few weeks - some of which have given conflicting information. I have been reverting these edits as including her height doesn't seem to have any revelance to the article in my opinion. Does anyone have any views on this? Cheers Paul20070 (talk) 19:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * She isn't 6 foot 2 that's for sure as I've met her in real life and I'm 5 foot 8. This article from Five news - her current employer - says she 5 foot 7.  I think even that is untrue and I'm guessing she's actually 5 foot 5 or 5 foot 6.  Either way its not important information (why am I typing this?), she's not known for her height, so it shouldn't be there. Sleepysod (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC) sleepysod --Sleepysod (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't see that her height is important but at least get it right or at least stick to what she says her height is. --jmb (talk) 13:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Asked whether her looks have been a help or a hindrance, Natasha becomes unexpectedly bashful. "I don't know whether I would say I am beautiful, but I think I look OK on television. Otherwise, I'm too short and fat and I've got cellulite." Fat? Even bearing in mind your average woman's body dysmorphia, it's hard to let this one go. "I have an unbelievable amount of fat days," she insists. "I'm 5 ft 4 inches and I wish I was taller. I pay a hefty gym subscription, but I'd pay twice as much never to have to go again. Then again, as a newsreader you're not supposed to have your appearance noticed too much because then it's a distraction. If you are just thinking, 'That lady's earrings are caught up in the curl of her hair,' you can't concentrate on what she's saying."
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by LUNDAVRA (talk • contribs) 13:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * She is 6ft 2, thats very tall. If any other height is stated then that is pure Bollo, she's genuinely that tall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Safcfan73 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The fact that Ms Kaplinsky declared that she was temporarily leaving Five News due to her maternity leave on the 21st August 2008 at the end of the 7pm show should be added to her page on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monsouuse (talk • contribs) 18:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, she also said much the same at the end of the 5pm bulletin though I'm not sure it's strictly necessary to add this information. In any case, I've added a note that her maternity leave began following the bullet. I'll look out for a reference for it. TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Togo ?
Is the reference to Togo vandalism? All the edits were added by the same person (87.208.1.218), there is no mention of Togo in the reference quoted and I cannot remember it being mentioned on Who Do You Think You Are. --jmb (talk) 10:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

When did she work in the Labour Party Office
In the Biography section it states, without citation that "After graduating in English from Hertford College, Oxford, one of her first jobs was working in the press offices of Labour leaders Neil Kinnock and John Smith."

However, there is a 2005 profile (it is located in the profiles subsirectory on the Independent website) in the Independent that says that she worked in the Labour party office in 1992, after gaining her A-Levels NOT after graduating from University. There is no mention of John Smith in that article. What it does say is that the experience put her off politics.

On the Jewish debate above, the same article says that she a regular attender of Anglican services.

Kuitan (talk) 17:45, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You're welcome to change the article. TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

English Jews
Someone anonymously added the category English Jews to this article, but given previous discussions on the topic I've removed it again. I know she is of Jewish descent, but I'm not sure whether she regards herself as Jewish. I think the category should only be added if she does. TheRetroGuy (talk) 18:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:21, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Natasha Kaplinsky 2015.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:26, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Natasha Kaplinsky 2015.jpg