This article is written in
Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
Born in 1965, and enters a teen modeling pageant in 1988? At age 13 or 23?? Unfortunately, this obvious discrepancy is propagated on the the web bios
[1] I found. My guess is that the pageant was in 1978, but can anyone clear this up? --
Paul Richter 06:31, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
In the section on Linda Evangelistas life there is no mention of her early marriage to Lloyd Bloom.
Fred Derkoski
Linda was never married to Lloyd Bloom.
Who the heck is Lloyd Bloom??
This profile is so pathetic. So much good information has gotten erased over the past couple of years. Linda is the greatest fashion model EVER. She's a legend and she gets a profile that profiles her hairstyles up to the mid-90s? Pathetic. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.197.247.41 (
talk)
22:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Am I the only person who noticed most of the page (two thirds) consists of giant tables of list of Vogue cover models over the years? What's the point of this here?--
74.56.234.186 (
talk)
04:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)reply
I have no opinion on the variety of English used in the article. I was simply making a non-controversial—especially non-controversial judging by the length of time it took someone else to comment—requested edit.
Reaper Eternal (
talk)
07:47, 28 February 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Reaper Eternal: Well, although it seemed that way at the time, I'm bringing up this issue now that I've stumbled across it. Why has no one addressed the guideline I mentioned below? The use of American English on this page is unwarranted both from the subject of the article standpoint, as well as the English variety first used back in 2006 standpoint. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★13:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)reply
MOS:RETAIN states "When no English variety has been established and discussion does not resolve the issue, use the variety found in the first post-stub revision that introduced an identifiable variety."
[2] used "colour". It does not make sense for a Canadian to have its article written in American English, let alone have a template of the language as an edit notice. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★22:04, 26 February 2019 (UTC)reply
.......Ok? I just showed a MoS based guideline that says we should use what was first used, which was Canadian English. And rightly so since she is Canadian. There is no guideline for that sentiment, but it makes the most sense. Tell me why we would use American English in this case? Anyway, that's besides the point, the RETAIN guide speaks for itself. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★02:44, 27 February 2019 (UTC)reply
I am the user who has submitted more 70% of the text in this article, and prior to my edits, this entire article was only 4 paragraphs long. 70+% of the article text was written in American English. The editnotice was applied 4 years ago, and suddenly you want to change it just because the subject is from Canada?
Lupine453 (
talk)
05:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)reply
I see you had contributed significantly to this article, which the project thanks you for, but yes, that was only four years ago and the article was already non-stub before you had picked it up. The use of Canadian English spans much farther back from when the article was first brought out of stub-from - around 2006-07. Yes, we should use Canadian English partly because she is Canadian and the way that you changed the English variety in 2015 from American English to Canadian English was not discussed, but also largely due to
MOS:RETAIN which states we should use the first English variety from when it was non-stub, and therefore should be changed back to Canadian English. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★14:34, 27 February 2019 (UTC)reply
Oh, and admins have no particular say about content questions - if an admin weighs in here it will be as an editor, not as an administrator. If there is edit warring or obvious disruption, an uninvolved admin can step in and protect the article or block people as necessary, but let's hope it won't come to that. This needs to be solved with discussion and applying relevant guidelines. --bonadeacontributionstalk19:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your comment
Bonadea. This was the point I was trying to make, as well as others. Also with Daily Mail sources, they are not to be used, especially when there is more than one source available per
WP:DAILYMAIL1. Lupine is verging on
WP:OWN. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★19:18, 7 March 2019 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on
Linda Evangelista. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified 2 external links on
Linda Evangelista. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified one external link on
Linda Evangelista. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
I have just modified 6 external links on
Linda Evangelista. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.
That seems very arbitrary. Wikipedia's very own definition of a
supermodel "is a highly paid
fashion model who usually has a worldwide reputation and often a background in
haute couture and commercial modeling." Linda Evangelist would most definitely qualify under wikipedia's own set definition. I'd also like to note that the supermodel article lists Linda Evangelista as an example of one.
Auror Andrachome (
talk)
04:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)reply
You didn't at all understand what I said. There is no occupation called "supermodel"; it is entirely a subjective term. There's even a video of Linda herself saying the line "Well I don't know what a supermodel is".
This game of semantics is getting tired. Wikipedia describes a supermodel as "a highly paid fashion model who usually has a worldwide reputation and often a background in haute couture and commercial modeling." How curious that wikipedia itself believes it to be an occupation, albeit a more highly paid model.
Auror Andrachome (
talk)
15:04, 29 April 2018 (UTC)reply
the five supermodels?
In the first sentence of the third paragraph, the phrase, "as a key figure among the five supermodels" is confusing. Apologies if these supermodels are so well-known that they need no clarification.
Trilotat (
talk)
12:41, 18 May 2018 (UTC)reply
Getting out of bed - variation on a theme
Christopher Hitchens uses a variation on the theme of "not getting out of bed for less"
here at 3m30s in 1987, well before 1990 when Linda Evangelista gave her version.
See Wikiquote There must be much earlier versions than 1987.
Stikko (
talk)
10:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)reply