This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Patricia Heaton article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
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 sourced must 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 ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I've removed the POV on this page. Opinions are not good fodder for articles. Mike H 23:25, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
Can you please honor the standards for birth/death information found here and here? It's the standard. I'm sorry if you don't like it. If you don't, take it up at the appropriate page, but the standard is the standard for a reason, and has been for a very long time. RADICALBENDER ★ 21:04, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia is clearly comprised of two camps - those who spend a considerable amount of time doing research to create an item with a unique voice and sense of style, and those who think everything must conform to one boring format and edit instead of write. The very fact that the public is invited to this site to express themselves suggests it's not meant to look or sound like a standard encyclopedia. Lighten up and let people enjoy themselves as long as they're keeping to the spirit of things, if not the "standards" you obsessively embrace! TOM 12:51, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
I don't know why there is a debate here. We have standards so that the encyclopedia is consistent. I'm sorry if you find that "boring", but that's just the way it is. This is a collaborative project, and these are the standards that have been decided on by hundreds (thousands?) of collaborators long before you and I showed up. There is no reason to dismiss them out of a misguided sense of individuality. There is no personal expression in where you place an actress's birthdate. Yes, we value people expressing themselves, but just as important to the "spirit of things" is consensus. These standards have been decided by consensus and by defying them you are violating consensus and the spirit of things here on wikipedia. Perhaps if you could explain why there is a compelling reason not to have this actress's birthdate in the standard format or not to tell readers why she is important in the introduction, we could understand why you want to violate this consensus. Gamaliel 19:21, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
TOM, you said above about the public being encouraged to edit at Wikipedia. Yes that's totally true and the best way. The beautiful thing is that those people do not have to conform to the standards - their additions will be copyeditted by other people into the correct format. violet/riga (t) 18:45, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
violet/riga persists in stating that Heaton starred in three pilots that failed to become series, despite my advising her otherwise on her talk page. As proof, I offer the following:
What more does a person need to accept the fact he's wrong??? 64.12.116.68 22:58, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Apparently Violetriga doesn't understand that Wikipedia encourages contributors to enhance articles, since he or she keeps reverting the Heaton entry to her poorly-written version. Furthermore, he or she insists on misdescribing the purpose of Feminists for Life by trying to make it sound like their sole concern is abortion. It's one thing to think your writing is so wonderful it shouldn't be altered by others, quite another to intentionally distort the facts. Why hasn't she been banned for frequent vandalism of this article???? 152.163.100.68 12:38, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I really can't understand the way some people think. Stop being so stupid and paranoid that people are out to destroy the work you've been doing. I've explained myself time and again about this article but will once more. Hopefully this time you'll listen and stop playing around with the article. Right...
This article was the subject or a stupid argument about the layout of some images. After that somebody that had written quite a bit for this article started a revert war, claiming that their contributions are no longer allowed on Wikipedia. I argued and kept reverting to the fuller version. In an attempt at compromise I rewrote much of the article, adding some content but not as much as that other version. That person has since disappeared and is no longer reverting the work. You've now come along and undid what I did to his version. Since that version was the cause of so much grief I want to stay clear of it and use the new version that I wrote. Feel free to add to the version I have done and include everything in the other version (I want that included!) but don't revert it to the one that could cause problems should that original guy come back and revert again.
Now, I've explained. I'm going to put it back to my version again. I've warned you not to revert and will block you if you revert what I have written. And I'll stick to it this time. violet/riga (t) 17:01, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've been asked to intervene in this edit war and that's just what I'm going to do. First off, the insults end now. I don't care who started it, I'm putting everyone reading this on notice that the next person who posts anything remotely like an insult directed towards another editor on this page will get a 24 hour block, and then the prizes double each time after that. Please assume good faith and do not presume that other editors have hidden grudges, agendas, or issues. We should all have the same goal in mind, which is obviously to improve this article.
Towards that end, when this article gets unprotected, perhaps we can all agree not to make any more reverts? Let's keep the changes small and specific if we can. 64/152 (I am assuming you are the same person. Is that correct?), if there is specific information you feel violet/riga is leaving out, restore that information only and do not revert the entire article. Violet/riga, I'm aware about the problems we had with sftvlguy2, but the GNU licence is pretty clear and using his edits are fair game. I know you want to head off any problems with his complaints and vandalism, but is it really such a problem if some of his work is restored? Gamaliel 09:10, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
As someone fairly new to Wikipedia, I would appreciate your explaining how, if I didn't submit the suggestion to begin with, you were able to find it and revert it to the discussion page where I put it in the first place. What do you mean by an "edit conflict"? I made the entry, saved the page, saw it there with my signature and date and time stamp, only to find it missing shortly after. Now it's back EXACTLY as I wrote it. How did it disappear and reappear? What is it you "sectioned" and "organized" "properly" for me? I'm not being facetious, I'm trying to get a grasp of how Wikipedia works. As far as a compromise, I see no reason why the version I proposed can't be used. It has far more info than yours, and the data is in a sensible order (why would you put her husband and kids, for example, in the first paragraph? Is that what anyone immediately wants to know when they're looking up Patricia Heaton?) The FinalWord 21:52, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You know, I'm justing looking more carefully at the edit history here and find it somewhat amusing. The person that removed their "copywrighted material and photos" after an edit war with me and a few others is the same one that came back to fight to include it again. I really am interested in knowing how many people are involved here. Basically it's all ridiculous and while trying to help out I've just been attacked despite my good intentions. I don't care what happens here now as I have no idea who I'm arguing with and what their opinions are. I withdraw any objection to any part of this argument because it's getting too difficult to keep track of the anons/users opinions and I have no interest in fighting other peoples battles. Use whatever version you want. Serves me right for trying to help. violet/riga (t) 22:52, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The FinalWord, your behavior on this page is highly inappropriate. This talk page is a forum for discussing improvements to the article, not for paranoid accusations and questioning someone's fitness to be an administrator. Further inappropriate comments along these lines will be deleted, and then at that point you can question my fitness as an administrator too, but you can do it somewhere else.
I noticed you immediately rushed in to revert as soon as the page was unprotected. I've made some minor changes to the article along with explainations of each one. If you are interested in discussion and compromise then we can discuss changes and problems here, but if you want a revert war, then we can have that too. Gamaliel 01:18, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Accusing another editor of deleting your comments with zero evidence is not an effort to understand Wikipedia procedures, nor is it in any sense appropriate behavior, newcomer or not. You are not entitled to use this talk page as a soapbox - you've already complained, and if you still feel more needs to be done, you can follow the proper procedures at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution, but you won't be allowed to continue to make attacks and lodge a continuing series of complaints here. Your opinions do matter, but you simply are not allowed to do whatever you want, however justified you feel you are. Gamaliel 03:27, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I have no interest in any sort of administrative solidarity. In fact, I disagree with Violetriga on several major points about this article, and if you were not so busy playing the victim and willing to discuss this article calmly, you would have found that out. If you feel that I was nasty to you, I apologize, but I feel that you have been quite nasty to Violetriga, with little cause. How exactly have you, as a humble peon, been harmed? You have not been blocked, banned, or silenced. How have you been oppressed by the cabal? I can't explain what happened to that edit of yours, but I have some familiarilty with administrative powers, and I certainly would not be able to do what you attribute to Violetriga. I am not a tech geek, perhaps we could find one to explain what actually did happen. Regardless, you have made your accusation and there is no reason to complain about that further unless you have something new to add. If you still feel that an injustice has been done to you, please follow the proper procedures at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I would like to get along with you but you really need to dial it back and stop personalizing this dispute. Gamaliel 06:31, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
It seems to me that The FinalWord, 152.163.100.68, 152.163.100.69 and 64.12.116.68 are the same person - trying to hide behind IP addresses (and, I believe, different usernames) and state that you've "come along late to the discussion" is just pathetic. Using your newbieness as a shield, while appropriate to some extent, is just trying to get pity. I hope you will avoid such actions and accusations in the future - you obviously want to contribute to Wikipedia, which is a good thing, but there is no reason for the attitude and personal attacks you've done here. If you'd been more truthful and friendlier this would've been dealt with long ago. Any further responses from you should kindly appear on my talk page rather than here. violet/riga (t) 11:17, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Patricia Heaton (born March 4, 1958) is an American actress.
She was born in Bay Village, a suburb of Cleveland, Ohio, and is the daughter of well-known Cleveland Plain Dealer sportswriter Chuck Heaton. She moved to New York City to study with drama teacher William Esper after graduating from Ohio State University.
She made her Broadway debut in the musical Don't Get God Started, after which she and fellow students created Stage Three, an off-Broadway acting troupe. When they brought one of their productions to Los Angeles, Heaton caught the eye of a casting director for the ABC drama thirtysomething, leading to three appearances on the series. She was featured in three unsuccessful sitcoms - Room for Two ( 1992) with Linda Lavin, Someone Like Me ( 1994), and Women of the House ( 1995) with Delta Burke - before landing the plum role of beleagured wife, mother, and in-law Debra Barone in the hit CBS comedy series Everybody Loves Raymond ( 1996 - 2004) with Ray Romano. Since 1999, she has been nominated every year for an Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series Emmy, winning the award twice. She has also collected two Viewers for Quality Television awards and a Screen Actors Guild trophy for her work on the series.
Heaton's made-for-television movies include Shattered Dreams, Miracle in the Woods, A Town Without Christmas, and the remake of Neil Simon's The Goodbye Girl with Jeff Daniels for TNT. Her feature films include Memoirs of an Invisible Man, Beethoven, and Space Jam.
Heaton is the honorary chairperson of Feminists for Life. This nonsectarian, nonpartisan organization opposes all forms of cruelty, including domestic violence, child abuse, infanticide, and abortion.
Her memoir, Motherhood and Hollywood - How to Get a Job Like Mine, was published by Villard Books in 2002.
Since 2003, Heaton has appeared in a series of humorous television commercials as spokesperson for the grocery store chain Albertsons.
Heaton has been married to British businessman David Hunt II since 1990. The couple has four sons and divides their time between Los Angeles and England, where they own a country estate.
Hi, I came in from RfC. I like the standardized birth info in the first sentence. I like the first-para reference to Everybody Loves Raymond; this may not always be the best lead-in for Ms. Heaton's life, but for the present era this establishes her most notable context. I think the Feminists for Life reference should be short, non-praising, and optionally quickly mention the two salient features of the group that make it unusual—it's leftist but it's anti-abortion. Something like: "Heaton is the honorary chairperson of [[Feminists for Life]], a left-leaning group opposing abortion and cruelty." -- Gary D 01:59, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
Sources for Heaton having a divorce from her first husband, and currently attending a Presbyterian church: Denver Catholic Register(CNS) Sources for Heaton having a divorce from her first husband: IMDb, E! Online, Sources for Heaton attending a Presbyterian church nowadays: Netscape celebrity, her memoir, Motherhood and Hollywood - How to Get a Job Like Mine. Niteowlneils 22:15, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hey and by the way, it put's her in the Roman Catholic Category when a documentary on E! w/ her saying that she has been reborn as a Presbyterian, but it's better to say she is not an Catholic or a Presbyterian, but a CHRISTIAN. Does it matter her denomination? Yes, but to categorize her as a Christian. The Texas Drama King 03:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
She dyes her hair red. It's not natural. How is that her trademark, then? Mike H 21:33, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
I have a pic of her bare boobs (Shadow Gale)
The falsifications in her conservative hit piece movie The Path to 9/11 are not "alleged". They are indeed false. See here: http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism 68.192.53.216 23:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
I tried to reformat her career info a bit, grouping it together with like info.
Also thought some of the text about her political views was a bit POV. I don't agree with her, but every article needs neutral POV, I tried to make this one more neutral. NickBurns 20:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The way the paragraph about her opposition to medical research is worded makes it sound like her position is the only one any reasonable person would take, DONT TAKE SIDES, it needs rewritten. Stevenscollege 23:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I rewrote the paragraph, so now it just tells us the facts, she was in an commercial opposing a Missouri state constitutional amendment. Stevenscollege 23:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know she only opposes EMBRYONIC stem cell research. Changing to clarify. 01:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
What place does a statement about her religion have in a section entitled POLITICAL advocacy? Kinda sounds like the way the country is going...separation of church and state, yet it is never separated. 67.186.151.232 01:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
If an editor wanted, 'Religion' could be in the top right box of the article. Right? Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 00:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Someone needs to add a mention of The Scene, the play Heaton is (currently?) appearing in on Broadway, to the "Career" section. It's discussed extensively in the NY Times article linked to at the bottom. I don't know how to do the citation correctly, or I'd do it myself. TysK 01:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Is the wiki link to David Hunt in the info box correct? There are several David Hunt articles, and none of them seem to mention that Patricia Heaton is his spouse. If the link is not correct, the link should be removed, leaving just the raw text "David Hunt" name. Truthanado 04:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
It is well know she has breast implants this should be mentioned in the article TG 50 20:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I put up a resource her autobiography and and a personal qoute from her and i think the reason why this is worthy to mention is because it is a fact about the person and thier body and it also contributes a key part into the look of a person as she is free with her sexuality and her body and obvious likes to improve her looks to help her live healthy and feel good about her self and perfers big breasts. TG 50 01:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
It's quite obvious that she's had numerous cosmetic surgeries.
Do a search on 'implants' on the article herein and you will have zero hits, ;-) which is appropriate since WP editors need to be extra cautious with a living person. (Wikipedia rules.) She looks lovely. And her personality is always charming. Be gracious and appreciative! — Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 00:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Can anyone find a photo for this article? I think she way too famous to not have a picture.
In 'First', magazine for women, there is a picture of Patricia on her 50th birthday at a beach. And she has no belly button. Fatin '08! ( talk) 01:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Haha thats funny. Can you add a link? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.221.240.119 (
talk)
20:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
It's true. I saw a photo of her bikini shot. However, it's not true that her 1st husband divorced her for that (it was the result of surgery after four c-sections). I actually knew her 1st husband, "Charlie", whom she divorced in 1987. He was a very nice guy and we lost contact before ELR started. We worked together in NYC (1992-94) as waiters. This was before she hit fame with ELR. He spoke about Patricia every once in a while and did mention he divorced her for fraud but he NEVER told me what the act of fraud was. Poor guy! I'm sure her stardom must have crushed him (He was a struggling theater actor back then). Good luck, Charlie! <Signed by Sam>
79.43.162.24 (
talk)
14:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Fyi, this article is the target of a left wing political site. See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4645643 Dman727 ( talk) 04:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
For your information, Democratic Underground is not a left wing hate site. Please accept the facts as they are. Sarah Palin endangered her own unborn child which contradicts both her and Ms. Heaton's Pro-Life stance. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Jesus Faked his Death (
talk •
contribs)
05:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
The article seems biased where her politics is concerned. Did she really do all that apologizing? What did she have to apologize for? That seems very fishy to me. How about some documentation? For the record, I think she's great. She should run for office. -- 24.177.0.156 ( talk) 16:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
During a grocery store strike, Heaton crossed the picket lines (metaphorically) by agreeing to shoot commercials (she was spokeswoman for Albertsons chain). She tried to duck responsibility by claiming that she was under contract, but others contradicted her pointing out that the talent unions have provisions that protect members from having to do so. It was the first time her politics became widely known. RoyBatty42 ( talk) 18:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
The is no correct. It chould be http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0461660/link to The Engagement Ring — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.92 ( talk) 19:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
QUESTION: Does the unsigned reader mean 'The' or 'This' and 'no' or 'not' and 'could' or 'should' ? At any rate, the article links are fine.
Do a Google-search and you can find Patricia Heaton in "The Engagement Ring" at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0461660/ (and if you have 'link' after that, the page is not found.)
Headine-1: Patricia Heaton calls for help for Philippines
QUOTE: “ NOV 22, 2013” [She supported Helping Hands after the typhoon in the Philippines] — Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 20:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedia editors! I am interested in helping to improve Eden Sher’s Wikipedia page as part of a class project. I was thinking about adding more information to the personal life section, which could use some development. If you have any suggestions as to other parts of her page that could use some development or new sections that should be added to her page, feel free to let me know as I am willing to help improve this page as much as possible. Thank you for your help! Kmccamy14 ( talk) 02:49, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Patricia Heaton. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Patricia Heaton. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Patricia Heaton. 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, 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Can somebody sort out the "death" of Patricia please .......... 80.192.223.213 ( talk) 09:37, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
FourBoys Entertainment. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 17#FourBoys Entertainment until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠)
21:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Not sure if this matters, but she's 5'3" tall or 63 inches tall... Jacobroecker ( talk) 02:33, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
In the first paragraph of the "Politics" section, the last sentence reads:
After the January 6 United States Capitol attack, Heaton announced that she would leave the Republican Party and become an independent voter.
An IP editor 147.161.225.106 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is edit-waring to replace it with this version:
After the Washington DC Capitol Protest, [1] Heaton announced that she would leave the Republican Party and become an independent voter.
I invite the IP and other interested editors to offer their opinion on how that sentence should read. Let's see if a consensus can form to keep it or an alternate version. — Archer1234 ( t· c) 11:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Patricia Heaton article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
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 sourced must 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 ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I've removed the POV on this page. Opinions are not good fodder for articles. Mike H 23:25, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)
Can you please honor the standards for birth/death information found here and here? It's the standard. I'm sorry if you don't like it. If you don't, take it up at the appropriate page, but the standard is the standard for a reason, and has been for a very long time. RADICALBENDER ★ 21:04, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia is clearly comprised of two camps - those who spend a considerable amount of time doing research to create an item with a unique voice and sense of style, and those who think everything must conform to one boring format and edit instead of write. The very fact that the public is invited to this site to express themselves suggests it's not meant to look or sound like a standard encyclopedia. Lighten up and let people enjoy themselves as long as they're keeping to the spirit of things, if not the "standards" you obsessively embrace! TOM 12:51, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
I don't know why there is a debate here. We have standards so that the encyclopedia is consistent. I'm sorry if you find that "boring", but that's just the way it is. This is a collaborative project, and these are the standards that have been decided on by hundreds (thousands?) of collaborators long before you and I showed up. There is no reason to dismiss them out of a misguided sense of individuality. There is no personal expression in where you place an actress's birthdate. Yes, we value people expressing themselves, but just as important to the "spirit of things" is consensus. These standards have been decided by consensus and by defying them you are violating consensus and the spirit of things here on wikipedia. Perhaps if you could explain why there is a compelling reason not to have this actress's birthdate in the standard format or not to tell readers why she is important in the introduction, we could understand why you want to violate this consensus. Gamaliel 19:21, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
TOM, you said above about the public being encouraged to edit at Wikipedia. Yes that's totally true and the best way. The beautiful thing is that those people do not have to conform to the standards - their additions will be copyeditted by other people into the correct format. violet/riga (t) 18:45, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
violet/riga persists in stating that Heaton starred in three pilots that failed to become series, despite my advising her otherwise on her talk page. As proof, I offer the following:
What more does a person need to accept the fact he's wrong??? 64.12.116.68 22:58, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Apparently Violetriga doesn't understand that Wikipedia encourages contributors to enhance articles, since he or she keeps reverting the Heaton entry to her poorly-written version. Furthermore, he or she insists on misdescribing the purpose of Feminists for Life by trying to make it sound like their sole concern is abortion. It's one thing to think your writing is so wonderful it shouldn't be altered by others, quite another to intentionally distort the facts. Why hasn't she been banned for frequent vandalism of this article???? 152.163.100.68 12:38, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I really can't understand the way some people think. Stop being so stupid and paranoid that people are out to destroy the work you've been doing. I've explained myself time and again about this article but will once more. Hopefully this time you'll listen and stop playing around with the article. Right...
This article was the subject or a stupid argument about the layout of some images. After that somebody that had written quite a bit for this article started a revert war, claiming that their contributions are no longer allowed on Wikipedia. I argued and kept reverting to the fuller version. In an attempt at compromise I rewrote much of the article, adding some content but not as much as that other version. That person has since disappeared and is no longer reverting the work. You've now come along and undid what I did to his version. Since that version was the cause of so much grief I want to stay clear of it and use the new version that I wrote. Feel free to add to the version I have done and include everything in the other version (I want that included!) but don't revert it to the one that could cause problems should that original guy come back and revert again.
Now, I've explained. I'm going to put it back to my version again. I've warned you not to revert and will block you if you revert what I have written. And I'll stick to it this time. violet/riga (t) 17:01, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've been asked to intervene in this edit war and that's just what I'm going to do. First off, the insults end now. I don't care who started it, I'm putting everyone reading this on notice that the next person who posts anything remotely like an insult directed towards another editor on this page will get a 24 hour block, and then the prizes double each time after that. Please assume good faith and do not presume that other editors have hidden grudges, agendas, or issues. We should all have the same goal in mind, which is obviously to improve this article.
Towards that end, when this article gets unprotected, perhaps we can all agree not to make any more reverts? Let's keep the changes small and specific if we can. 64/152 (I am assuming you are the same person. Is that correct?), if there is specific information you feel violet/riga is leaving out, restore that information only and do not revert the entire article. Violet/riga, I'm aware about the problems we had with sftvlguy2, but the GNU licence is pretty clear and using his edits are fair game. I know you want to head off any problems with his complaints and vandalism, but is it really such a problem if some of his work is restored? Gamaliel 09:10, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
As someone fairly new to Wikipedia, I would appreciate your explaining how, if I didn't submit the suggestion to begin with, you were able to find it and revert it to the discussion page where I put it in the first place. What do you mean by an "edit conflict"? I made the entry, saved the page, saw it there with my signature and date and time stamp, only to find it missing shortly after. Now it's back EXACTLY as I wrote it. How did it disappear and reappear? What is it you "sectioned" and "organized" "properly" for me? I'm not being facetious, I'm trying to get a grasp of how Wikipedia works. As far as a compromise, I see no reason why the version I proposed can't be used. It has far more info than yours, and the data is in a sensible order (why would you put her husband and kids, for example, in the first paragraph? Is that what anyone immediately wants to know when they're looking up Patricia Heaton?) The FinalWord 21:52, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You know, I'm justing looking more carefully at the edit history here and find it somewhat amusing. The person that removed their "copywrighted material and photos" after an edit war with me and a few others is the same one that came back to fight to include it again. I really am interested in knowing how many people are involved here. Basically it's all ridiculous and while trying to help out I've just been attacked despite my good intentions. I don't care what happens here now as I have no idea who I'm arguing with and what their opinions are. I withdraw any objection to any part of this argument because it's getting too difficult to keep track of the anons/users opinions and I have no interest in fighting other peoples battles. Use whatever version you want. Serves me right for trying to help. violet/riga (t) 22:52, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The FinalWord, your behavior on this page is highly inappropriate. This talk page is a forum for discussing improvements to the article, not for paranoid accusations and questioning someone's fitness to be an administrator. Further inappropriate comments along these lines will be deleted, and then at that point you can question my fitness as an administrator too, but you can do it somewhere else.
I noticed you immediately rushed in to revert as soon as the page was unprotected. I've made some minor changes to the article along with explainations of each one. If you are interested in discussion and compromise then we can discuss changes and problems here, but if you want a revert war, then we can have that too. Gamaliel 01:18, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Accusing another editor of deleting your comments with zero evidence is not an effort to understand Wikipedia procedures, nor is it in any sense appropriate behavior, newcomer or not. You are not entitled to use this talk page as a soapbox - you've already complained, and if you still feel more needs to be done, you can follow the proper procedures at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution, but you won't be allowed to continue to make attacks and lodge a continuing series of complaints here. Your opinions do matter, but you simply are not allowed to do whatever you want, however justified you feel you are. Gamaliel 03:27, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I have no interest in any sort of administrative solidarity. In fact, I disagree with Violetriga on several major points about this article, and if you were not so busy playing the victim and willing to discuss this article calmly, you would have found that out. If you feel that I was nasty to you, I apologize, but I feel that you have been quite nasty to Violetriga, with little cause. How exactly have you, as a humble peon, been harmed? You have not been blocked, banned, or silenced. How have you been oppressed by the cabal? I can't explain what happened to that edit of yours, but I have some familiarilty with administrative powers, and I certainly would not be able to do what you attribute to Violetriga. I am not a tech geek, perhaps we could find one to explain what actually did happen. Regardless, you have made your accusation and there is no reason to complain about that further unless you have something new to add. If you still feel that an injustice has been done to you, please follow the proper procedures at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I would like to get along with you but you really need to dial it back and stop personalizing this dispute. Gamaliel 06:31, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
It seems to me that The FinalWord, 152.163.100.68, 152.163.100.69 and 64.12.116.68 are the same person - trying to hide behind IP addresses (and, I believe, different usernames) and state that you've "come along late to the discussion" is just pathetic. Using your newbieness as a shield, while appropriate to some extent, is just trying to get pity. I hope you will avoid such actions and accusations in the future - you obviously want to contribute to Wikipedia, which is a good thing, but there is no reason for the attitude and personal attacks you've done here. If you'd been more truthful and friendlier this would've been dealt with long ago. Any further responses from you should kindly appear on my talk page rather than here. violet/riga (t) 11:17, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Patricia Heaton (born March 4, 1958) is an American actress.
She was born in Bay Village, a suburb of Cleveland, Ohio, and is the daughter of well-known Cleveland Plain Dealer sportswriter Chuck Heaton. She moved to New York City to study with drama teacher William Esper after graduating from Ohio State University.
She made her Broadway debut in the musical Don't Get God Started, after which she and fellow students created Stage Three, an off-Broadway acting troupe. When they brought one of their productions to Los Angeles, Heaton caught the eye of a casting director for the ABC drama thirtysomething, leading to three appearances on the series. She was featured in three unsuccessful sitcoms - Room for Two ( 1992) with Linda Lavin, Someone Like Me ( 1994), and Women of the House ( 1995) with Delta Burke - before landing the plum role of beleagured wife, mother, and in-law Debra Barone in the hit CBS comedy series Everybody Loves Raymond ( 1996 - 2004) with Ray Romano. Since 1999, she has been nominated every year for an Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series Emmy, winning the award twice. She has also collected two Viewers for Quality Television awards and a Screen Actors Guild trophy for her work on the series.
Heaton's made-for-television movies include Shattered Dreams, Miracle in the Woods, A Town Without Christmas, and the remake of Neil Simon's The Goodbye Girl with Jeff Daniels for TNT. Her feature films include Memoirs of an Invisible Man, Beethoven, and Space Jam.
Heaton is the honorary chairperson of Feminists for Life. This nonsectarian, nonpartisan organization opposes all forms of cruelty, including domestic violence, child abuse, infanticide, and abortion.
Her memoir, Motherhood and Hollywood - How to Get a Job Like Mine, was published by Villard Books in 2002.
Since 2003, Heaton has appeared in a series of humorous television commercials as spokesperson for the grocery store chain Albertsons.
Heaton has been married to British businessman David Hunt II since 1990. The couple has four sons and divides their time between Los Angeles and England, where they own a country estate.
Hi, I came in from RfC. I like the standardized birth info in the first sentence. I like the first-para reference to Everybody Loves Raymond; this may not always be the best lead-in for Ms. Heaton's life, but for the present era this establishes her most notable context. I think the Feminists for Life reference should be short, non-praising, and optionally quickly mention the two salient features of the group that make it unusual—it's leftist but it's anti-abortion. Something like: "Heaton is the honorary chairperson of [[Feminists for Life]], a left-leaning group opposing abortion and cruelty." -- Gary D 01:59, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)
Sources for Heaton having a divorce from her first husband, and currently attending a Presbyterian church: Denver Catholic Register(CNS) Sources for Heaton having a divorce from her first husband: IMDb, E! Online, Sources for Heaton attending a Presbyterian church nowadays: Netscape celebrity, her memoir, Motherhood and Hollywood - How to Get a Job Like Mine. Niteowlneils 22:15, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Hey and by the way, it put's her in the Roman Catholic Category when a documentary on E! w/ her saying that she has been reborn as a Presbyterian, but it's better to say she is not an Catholic or a Presbyterian, but a CHRISTIAN. Does it matter her denomination? Yes, but to categorize her as a Christian. The Texas Drama King 03:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
She dyes her hair red. It's not natural. How is that her trademark, then? Mike H 21:33, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
I have a pic of her bare boobs (Shadow Gale)
The falsifications in her conservative hit piece movie The Path to 9/11 are not "alleged". They are indeed false. See here: http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism 68.192.53.216 23:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
I tried to reformat her career info a bit, grouping it together with like info.
Also thought some of the text about her political views was a bit POV. I don't agree with her, but every article needs neutral POV, I tried to make this one more neutral. NickBurns 20:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The way the paragraph about her opposition to medical research is worded makes it sound like her position is the only one any reasonable person would take, DONT TAKE SIDES, it needs rewritten. Stevenscollege 23:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I rewrote the paragraph, so now it just tells us the facts, she was in an commercial opposing a Missouri state constitutional amendment. Stevenscollege 23:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know she only opposes EMBRYONIC stem cell research. Changing to clarify. 01:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
What place does a statement about her religion have in a section entitled POLITICAL advocacy? Kinda sounds like the way the country is going...separation of church and state, yet it is never separated. 67.186.151.232 01:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
If an editor wanted, 'Religion' could be in the top right box of the article. Right? Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 00:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Someone needs to add a mention of The Scene, the play Heaton is (currently?) appearing in on Broadway, to the "Career" section. It's discussed extensively in the NY Times article linked to at the bottom. I don't know how to do the citation correctly, or I'd do it myself. TysK 01:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Is the wiki link to David Hunt in the info box correct? There are several David Hunt articles, and none of them seem to mention that Patricia Heaton is his spouse. If the link is not correct, the link should be removed, leaving just the raw text "David Hunt" name. Truthanado 04:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
It is well know she has breast implants this should be mentioned in the article TG 50 20:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I put up a resource her autobiography and and a personal qoute from her and i think the reason why this is worthy to mention is because it is a fact about the person and thier body and it also contributes a key part into the look of a person as she is free with her sexuality and her body and obvious likes to improve her looks to help her live healthy and feel good about her self and perfers big breasts. TG 50 01:04, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
It's quite obvious that she's had numerous cosmetic surgeries.
Do a search on 'implants' on the article herein and you will have zero hits, ;-) which is appropriate since WP editors need to be extra cautious with a living person. (Wikipedia rules.) She looks lovely. And her personality is always charming. Be gracious and appreciative! — Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 00:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
Can anyone find a photo for this article? I think she way too famous to not have a picture.
In 'First', magazine for women, there is a picture of Patricia on her 50th birthday at a beach. And she has no belly button. Fatin '08! ( talk) 01:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Haha thats funny. Can you add a link? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.221.240.119 (
talk)
20:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
It's true. I saw a photo of her bikini shot. However, it's not true that her 1st husband divorced her for that (it was the result of surgery after four c-sections). I actually knew her 1st husband, "Charlie", whom she divorced in 1987. He was a very nice guy and we lost contact before ELR started. We worked together in NYC (1992-94) as waiters. This was before she hit fame with ELR. He spoke about Patricia every once in a while and did mention he divorced her for fraud but he NEVER told me what the act of fraud was. Poor guy! I'm sure her stardom must have crushed him (He was a struggling theater actor back then). Good luck, Charlie! <Signed by Sam>
79.43.162.24 (
talk)
14:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Fyi, this article is the target of a left wing political site. See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4645643 Dman727 ( talk) 04:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
For your information, Democratic Underground is not a left wing hate site. Please accept the facts as they are. Sarah Palin endangered her own unborn child which contradicts both her and Ms. Heaton's Pro-Life stance. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Jesus Faked his Death (
talk •
contribs)
05:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
The article seems biased where her politics is concerned. Did she really do all that apologizing? What did she have to apologize for? That seems very fishy to me. How about some documentation? For the record, I think she's great. She should run for office. -- 24.177.0.156 ( talk) 16:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
During a grocery store strike, Heaton crossed the picket lines (metaphorically) by agreeing to shoot commercials (she was spokeswoman for Albertsons chain). She tried to duck responsibility by claiming that she was under contract, but others contradicted her pointing out that the talent unions have provisions that protect members from having to do so. It was the first time her politics became widely known. RoyBatty42 ( talk) 18:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
The is no correct. It chould be http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0461660/link to The Engagement Ring — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.82.9.92 ( talk) 19:24, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
QUESTION: Does the unsigned reader mean 'The' or 'This' and 'no' or 'not' and 'could' or 'should' ? At any rate, the article links are fine.
Do a Google-search and you can find Patricia Heaton in "The Engagement Ring" at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0461660/ (and if you have 'link' after that, the page is not found.)
Headine-1: Patricia Heaton calls for help for Philippines
QUOTE: “ NOV 22, 2013” [She supported Helping Hands after the typhoon in the Philippines] — Charles Edwin Shipp ( talk) 20:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedia editors! I am interested in helping to improve Eden Sher’s Wikipedia page as part of a class project. I was thinking about adding more information to the personal life section, which could use some development. If you have any suggestions as to other parts of her page that could use some development or new sections that should be added to her page, feel free to let me know as I am willing to help improve this page as much as possible. Thank you for your help! Kmccamy14 ( talk) 02:49, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Patricia Heaton. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Patricia Heaton. 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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Patricia Heaton. 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, 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Can somebody sort out the "death" of Patricia please .......... 80.192.223.213 ( talk) 09:37, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
FourBoys Entertainment. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 17#FourBoys Entertainment until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠)
21:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Not sure if this matters, but she's 5'3" tall or 63 inches tall... Jacobroecker ( talk) 02:33, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
In the first paragraph of the "Politics" section, the last sentence reads:
After the January 6 United States Capitol attack, Heaton announced that she would leave the Republican Party and become an independent voter.
An IP editor 147.161.225.106 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is edit-waring to replace it with this version:
After the Washington DC Capitol Protest, [1] Heaton announced that she would leave the Republican Party and become an independent voter.
I invite the IP and other interested editors to offer their opinion on how that sentence should read. Let's see if a consensus can form to keep it or an alternate version. — Archer1234 ( t· c) 11:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)