edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Linda Robson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Linda Robson. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 3 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

That picture...

edit

Is that seriously the best picture we have? Is it not a bit inappropriate to make someone's only picture on their Wikipedia page one of them doing a rude gesture? Would she have made that gesture if she knew you'd stick it on her Wikipedia?? ~2025-31996-93 (talk) 19:49, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

She's probably the one that put that picture on there in the first place 😂😂 ~2025-31938-61 (talk) 20:09, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
The picture was stolen from someones facebook page. i believe a user of wikipedia called Meena stole it. ~2025-31604-10 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Linda Robson Picture

edit


  • The Photo needs changing or removed (format using {{textdiff}}):
  • The photo was stolen, cropped and permission to use it is not granted:
  • The owner of photo is angry and upset, and is reporting via police (format using the "cite" button):

~2025-31604-10 (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

References

 Done Given that the same user has uploaded a bunch of images of Robson to Commons with almost identical captions saying they took the photos (spread over many years) and cropped themselves out, I'm thinking they are likely incorrectly licensed. I have removed the image from the article and will see what needs to be done on Commons. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
Based on evidence provided at Commons, it would appear as if these are in fact properly licensed images. I have added a less controversial photo back into the article. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 22:43, 7 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
The photos in the commons uploaded by a simon dwain, is actually someone pretending to be someone else. The user is a fraud, as well as stealing pics from someones facebook page to put on here. ~2025-31604-10 (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2025 (UTC)Reply
The images have licences, but there's no proof that the uploader on Commons is the person that they claim to be: this could well be someone who has taken pre-existing photos from social media without permission. There are a few other odd details around this - I've raised the issue on Commons at Commons:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#Likely Vanderpumpstan socks. Belbury (talk) 19:27, 14 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

edit

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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2025 (UTC)Reply