Drew Barrymore was one of the Media and drama good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Screenwriters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of screenwriting, screenwriters, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScreenwritersWikipedia:WikiProject ScreenwritersTemplate:WikiProject Screenwritersscreenwriter articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in business on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject Women in BusinessTemplate:WikiProject Women in BusinessWomen in Business articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
Latest comment: 9 months ago13 comments8 people in discussion
What the title says. Articles on celebrities include their scandals, oftentimes showing up within hours of breaking. Yet this has curiously been left out of her article, despite the fact that it's old news.
It leads me to believe that the exclusion of this controversy is in fact being intentionally done. If that's the case it's extremely disappointing and alarming. This site is supposed to have integrity. 63.155.55.221 (talk) 00:58, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Read the article folks, Ms. Barrymore's recent action that has some characterizing her as a union strikebreaker - aka as a "scab" - has not been left out of the article - read the second paragraph in the 2020s section of the article, the paragraph that starts with "In September 2023, Barrymore crossed a WGA picket line to continue her syndicated TV talk show". Regardless of how people might feel about Ms. Barrymore's decision, Wikipedia articles about living peoplemust rely on what reliable sources state about her action. For instance, social media posts might characterize what she has done as "scabby" but they're self-published personal opinions and, as such, are not considered a published/reliable/editorially-supervised source. Shearonink (talk) 15:56, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
The verb tense should be changed to basic past tense in this section. The future-in-the-past tense of "would apologize" and "would delete" is awkwardly and incorrectly-used. She simply "apologized" and "deleted." 2600:1700:5531:3810:D21:99DB:C403:B873 (talk) 17:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
If you are referring to the lead, we would need reliable sources that claimed she was a scab. Do you have any reliable sources where the article's writer claimed she is one? --Super Goku V (talk) 11:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Reliable Source? Open a dictionary, there's your source.
Scab
skăb, n.
An employee who continues work while others are on strike.
What more of a source do you need beyond the meaning of the word and her saying "I'm continuing to work" while the union is on strike?? 209.216.100.15 (talk) 17:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Read the trades. Or the NY Times. Or CNN, People, even the NY Post...the subject of this article issued an update today. This discussion about using the word "scab" to describe her past action has become irrelevant. Shearonink (talk) 20:54, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
So add that she is a prior scab/acab wannabe until (appropriate) backlash, including protests from WGA strikers? KeepItAccurate1.2 (talk) 22:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia is edited by consensus. Present editorial consensus is against characterizing the subject of this article as a "scab". Describing her in such terms is a POV/personal opinion, violates WP:BLPSTYLE and is obviously WP:CONTENTIOUS. We may all have our own opinions about what the subject has done or not done, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia compiled from reliable sources, not someone's personal blog. The controversy is already discussed at length in the article. If anyone disagrees, consider opening up a WP:Rfc. Shearonink (talk) 03:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I would also commend the attention of the anonymous editors above to MOS:LABEL, which says we generally avoid using judgemental terms, at least not in Wikipedia's voice. Now, if someone prominent (like Fran Drescher) calls her a scab for this, that can be put in there, in quotes with attribution. But only then. Daniel Case (talk) 04:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I agree, Daniel Case - MOS:LABEL/WP:CONTENTIOUS is the applicable guideline here. Though I have seen people using the term on various social media platforms, I haven't seen union leaders/prominent Hollywood pundits being quoted in the trades using the descriptor under discussion here. Shearonink (talk) 15:35, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I doubt that Drescher will, actually. Union leadership usually tries to stay above that; the person you call a scab might have enough friends to tip a later election against you. Daniel Case (talk) 20:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Stalkers
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Is it worthwhile to mention the recent incident where a man rushed the stage and tried to so *something* to Drew Barrymore? It was a notable incident, but I am not sure if it is worth mentioning on her official page. I am sure that as a celebrity she has lots of weirdos obsessed with her -- letters, presents, videos -- but for one to make it that far? Scary. datagod (talk) 🍁05:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
