Jump to content

Talk:Margot Robbie: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Ezg333 (talk | contribs)
Line 115: Line 115:


Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 20:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Cheers.—[[User:Cyberbot II|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot II|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner]]:Online</sub></small> 20:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

== Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2016 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Margot Robbie|answered=no}}



[[User:Elishagale00|Elishagale00]] ([[User talk:Elishagale00|talk]]) 13:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)


Margot Robbie's website is shut down, therefore can't be reached.
In Margot Robbie's Wikipedia page, a link to a website called margotrobbie.com is displayed.
This website is non-existent and perhaps the information in her Wikipedia page leading people to the non-existent website should be removed.

Revision as of 13:44, 26 October 2016

Untitled

On 3rd May 2009, an anonymous user deleted a bunch of references. Was there a problem with those references ? ~ RJ4 (talk) 06:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was no objection, I have re-instated the refs.
RJ4 (talk) 08:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


One reference that should be deleted is her homepage as it is an advertorial for a skin care treatment, though it contains some minor citations/quotes from Margot, most of the content refers to Margot in a 'third party' context. Hence the whole site in itself is purely for comercial gain.

Fox 3000au (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a Reference, just an External Link.
Is there a rule against links to commercial sites ?
If so, that would mean we could not link to professional newspaper sites.
RJ4 (talk) 17:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Globes 2014

Headline: "Aussie green and gold! Naomi Watts dazzles in metallic while Margot Robbie teams her plunging white with emerald accessories as actresses attend Golden Globes"

A bunch of other pictures from the Hollywood event. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 16:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Personal Info

Margot's personal info is incorrect. She is not the "eldest of three" children. She's actually the second YOUNGEST of FOUR children. Her father's name also isn't "Mike". The following link contains a reference to her "three" siblings. This in itself is evidence enough for changing the entry (although it doesn't mention her position in the family).

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/how-did-margot-robbies-star-rise-so-quickly/story-e6frg8h6-1226814194675# 101.162.14.236 (talk) 14:52, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, when I checked the sources included in the article, here and here, neither supported the names and occupations of her parents, nor a specific number of siblings. I've removed the two sentences as a result.--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 20:46, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that! I'm a friend of the family, but obviously any info here needs to be verifiable using publicly accessible info. I appreciate your making the modification!101.162.14.236 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:24, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The personal info section is out of date - it uses 2010 sources (and poor sources at that). I suggest either update the section with relevant information, or delete the whole section. Paul haynes (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will Smith

Didn't something happen between them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Twa..tttz. (talkcontribs) 20:17, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

not according to this 5 albert square (talk) 20:24, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They made a film together, gave interviews together and denied any such rumours. Paul haynes (talk) 15:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article dated from 2008 referring to her then as 23 years old

Would this article being cited be enough to prove doubt on her actual date of birth?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/stay-in-touch/ramsay-st-gets-a-new-generation/2008/06/05/1212259007132.html ″One of the newest, Margot Robbie, had her first appearance on air on Monday, playing a groupie with stalker tendencies. The 23-year-old actress from the Gold Coast opted to attend a Sex And The City: The Movie screening instead of staying home to watch the episode.″ Wikispeaks (talk) 02:33, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No. A quick Google search is all it takes. This has been discussed before. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 04:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm afraid Google Search dates are disallowed since they're unsourced. Wikipedia also disallows the often-incorrect bio claims of IMDb. However, I did find a reliable source, AllMovie.com, for her birth date. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:54, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm to me this has the hallmarks of the situation encountered with Rebel Wilson and her real age controversy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rebel_Wilson#DOB:_The_evidence_from_before_she_was_world_famous Just wondering what would make a source from AllMovie.com more reliable than one from the Sydney Morning Herald describing her as 23 in 2008? Wikispeaks (talk) 05:47, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the actual articles given by the Google search, not the Google search dates. I'm sure at least one of them must be reliable. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 06:37, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The articles I saw on Google search were all either IMDb or non-RS blogs, fan pages and tabloid sites. Did you have a specific, citable source in mind?--Tenebrae (talk) 16:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How about the sources from the "Early life" section? 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 00:35, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't realize there was a discrepancy between the two. Performers not infrequently fudge their ages — see Mariah Carey, Li'l Kim and Marc Anthony, for example. In cases of equally reliable sources, we give both dates. Choosing one over the other would be POV. I'll adjust.--Tenebrae (talk) 16:43, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the Sydney Morning Herald article from 2008, before she was famous, seems much more credible to me; otherwise, she would have been 18 when she was on Neighbours, and why would the newspaper, a respected one, have not given the right age? (It's possible she lied to make herself appear older, I suppose.) That said, AllMovie.com is a reliable source by Wikipedia guidelines, so while I would go with the 2008 newspaper article, that would be my POV. We have to include both dates until something definitive appears. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:53, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this is fair for now. It will be interesting if any other news articles from before she was famous are found giving a similar age to the one given by the SMH? I doubt any actress ever chooses to give an older age and in almost all cases it's the opposite. Wikispeaks (talk) 23:05, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure this should have been changed so quickly with only one article giving a different age. What if it was just a mistake by that reporter? I believe there are a few sources in the early life/early career sections to back up 1990 as her birth year. I remember she celebrated her 18th birthday while she was on Neighbours and that source is in the article somewhere. - JuneGloom07 Talk 03:11, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That was also my impression – that it was just a mistake. Perhaps the writer put the wrong age in the wrong article, perhaps there was another article being written at the same time about a 23-year-old person and it got mixed up? Those are the questions I would ask. 4TheWynne(talk)(contribs) 03:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think for now the article should be taken for what it says without presumptions of error. The Sydney Morning Herald is a pretty respected news source with editors and such. If it was some blog or simple entertainment site it would make more sense perhaps to assume it was simply an error. Wikispeaks (talk) 16:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. And perhaps the discrepancy being given here will prompt her or her people to address the it. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Birthday

Her birthday is in July and she is 25. She celebrated her 25th birthday on the Set of Suicide Squad

http://www.ew.com/article/2015/07/04/margot-robbie-gets-harley-quinn-birthday-cake-suicide-squad-set — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.42.16.220 (talk) 15:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EW says "25-year-old", but neither of the referenced Instagrams by her, nor what we can see of the cake, says 25. Also, the day a birthday is celebrated isn't necessarily the day the birthday is, and with a cake on the 4th day of the month, the birth date could be late the previous month. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An anon-IP editor found an Elle interview published August 2015, in which Robbie says she is 24, which puts her birth year as circa 1991. Unlike what the anon IP claimed, the article gives no birth date. We don't know when the interview was conducted, but the writer also, separately, refers to Robbie as "a ... 24-year-old actress". If Robbie were 25 in August 2015, the writer would have said so. All we know for sure is that her age is given as 24 in August 2015. --Tenebrae (talk) 16:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An anon IP changed the birth date by essentially saying the Sydney Morning Herald is not RS. But it is. A redlink editor gave July 2, 1990, based on a post on Robbie's verified Instagram page, but A) that's a primary source, and B) the Instagram doesn't say a word about "July 2" — all it says is "75 weeks ago." Elle and the Sydney Morning Herald are equally RS and give different ages. Before favoring one over the other, which is POV, we need to reach consensus here, as per Wikipedia protocol. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:27, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Surely we can remove the SMH source saying her age is around 29-30, as in 2015 she said she is 24? (and possibly 25 in accordance with the 2 July 1990 source depending on when the interview was conducted). She's clearly not born in 1985, despite what the SMH article claims. There's also source 11 in the Early Career part (http://web.archive.org/web/20080902010920/http://neighbours.com.au/Happy-Birthday-Margot-Robbie.htm) which says she celebrated her 18th birthday in 2008. Sarahgj (talk) 05:46, 16 December 2015 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahgj (talkcontribs) 05:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Neighbours cite is very specific and agrees with AllMovie, which would have come well after Neighbours. Taken together with the Elle timeframe, I think we can go with that date, and simply note the SMH in the footnote so that the discrepancy is addressed. I'll do it now.
The Huff Post helped us out with an investigation: We Can Prove Margot Robbie Isn’t Lying About Her Age - JuneGloom07 Talk 23:47, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And the original source for the whole controversy - the Sydney Morning Herald article here - just added a correction to it: "This article originally stated Margot Robbie's age at the time of publication was 23. She was in fact 17 years old.". Tabercil (talk) 22:20, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Margot Robbie. 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 to let others know.

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 20:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2016


Elishagale00 (talk) 13:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Margot Robbie's website is shut down, therefore can't be reached. In Margot Robbie's Wikipedia page, a link to a website called margotrobbie.com is displayed. This website is non-existent and perhaps the information in her Wikipedia page leading people to the non-existent website should be removed.