Talk:Lindsay Lohan

Funnyordie video

Let me try to prevent a problem before it occurs. Her recent Funnyordie video (parody of eHarmony) does not belong in this article. It is miniscule trivia in the context of her entire life and career. There is already a reference and link to it at Funny or Die. Don't add it here without consensus. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 21:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I think given the level of attention the video ended up receiving from reliable sources it might deserve a a sentence or two here as part of her body of work. Just a brief description like "a spoof personal ad which was viewed 2.7 million times in less than a week". A full summary of the contents and/or quotes from the video is overboard in my opinion. I also think it belongs in the "Other work" section, not the "Personal life" section where it is right now. A few of the sources that covered the video: BBCAPReuters and MSNBC. The Telegraph ran an article which covers viewer numbers and some reactions. Siawase (talk) 19:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that a brief mention is appropriate. I left that in the article, but removed the more detailed description. If someone wants to move it to a different section, I don't have a problem with that. But I do have a problem with expanding it, per WP:WEIGHT and WP:RECENT. Ward3001 (talk) 20:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the video as a satire is the ultimate acknowledgement of all the rumours, innuendos etc. in a tongue-in-cheek manner. It doesn't verify the rumours at all, it simply plays up to them, quite hilariously. I think these kinds of self-parodies can potentially be very insightful: without editorialising on the extent to which the video is autobiographically accurate, I think including it with some quotes is quite conducive to building comprehensive, factual biographical information. At the very least, the one-line summary on the current version of the page is fine. I just want to point out that it's fairly incorrect to reduce this major stunt as "trivia".~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 22:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

In the entire context of her life and work, it's trivia; it happened to get some press attention. It doesn't need to be expanded. Read WP:RECENT and WP:WEIGHT. It may seem like big stuff now because it's getting some attention. In a few months or a year, no one will care. Ward3001 (talk) 23:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I moved it to the other works section, added sources, changed the wording a bit to be closer to the sources, and added a sentence on reception/why the video is notable. The ref formatting is very crude, but I'll be back to fix it later. Any input is most welcome. Siawase (talk) 16:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Alcoholism

I would be careful putting her in the "self-identifying alcoholics" category; going to a treatment program is not the same thing as publicly identifyuing as an alcoholic, which nothing cited in the article suggests she has done. Treybien 19:45 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Usually I would agree, but there is a direct quote by her in the article from a reliable source: "I am addicted to alcohol and drugs". I don't think we need to split hairs on whether "addicted to alcohol" is the same as "self-identifying alcoholic". Ward3001 (talk) 15:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The way the cat was added was a bit specious: [1][2] but like Ward says, that quote confirms it sufficiently. The somewhat random addition of her AA attendance wasn't really necessary. (Though to complicate matters, if I recall correctly, she denied being an alchoholic later on, after that statement was released.) Siawase (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

The Other Side

Lindsay will star in a new movie called "The Other Side".....filming starts in October.....[3]

Lindsay Lohan robbed

Lindsay Lohan's manssion was apparently broken into and an attempted robbery was made. Unfortunately the robbers found her house TOO MESSY so they didn't take anything. Since the New York Police was called on-scene, should this be included, or since they didn't take anything its not important enough to include? I heard it on Reuters too but here is a source (http://www.miley5.net/content/index.php?action=show&id=7) Lindsaylohanfanfare (talk) 23:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Not with that source, which describes itself as the "number one source for celebrity gossip". This can wait until it reaches the mainstream media, if it ever does. This is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid newspaper. We don't have to rush to include every little tidbit of gossip as soon as it hits the tabloids. Ward3001 (talk) 00:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

If the report of the state of the Mansion is true seems Lindsey is in good company. When Gordon Brown the Prime Minister of Great Britain was her age the same type of burglary happened to his flat. On being called by the Police to attend the flat after the burglary the Officer who greeted him said; 'I'm afraid they have turned the place upside down Sir and made a real mess'. Gordon Brown looked around and said "no, no, Officer, it looks like this all the time". Let's not forget Lindsay is only a young girl.Johnwrd (talk) 00:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

New picture

I was wondering if we could get a new main picture of Lindsay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blsupr (talk • contribs) 04:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but since pictures of living people on wikipedia have to be under a free license, it's been hard to find pictures of Lohan that qualify. If you want to try looking, flickr is a pretty good place to start, some more info at Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr. Siawase (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Structure

Ashley92995 changed the header "Acting career" to "Modeling and Acting career". I reverted because right now it's misleading; the bulk of info about her modelling career is in the "Other works" section. When rearranging the article earlier to create the "Other work" section I left the her earliest modelling work in the acting section to try to somewhat keep a chronological order. Maybe it would be better to move that bit to the "Other work" section too, but I feel that would make the article harder to follow. As a note, the "Acting career" section was always named that, even though it used to include various other work.
On a related note, anyone got an opinion on whether we should include year spans (ie: 2003-2006: and 2007-Present:) to the headers in that section? Siawase (talk) 07:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Measurments?

How tall bust size waist hips shoe size etc.