Talk:Paul Darrow

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Why is he categorized as Jewish? Is there evidence for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.55.33 (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Darrow is his working surname.

His autobiography "You're him aren't you" will be published imminently.

(To be incorporated as appropriate)

Jackiespeel 21:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He cannot be categorised as Jewish unless a reliable source can be cited for his being Jewish. Every claim made on Wikipedia must be confirmed by an appropriate citation. 92.22.189.205 (talk) 22:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the source for the latest category addition? Jackiespeel (talk) 09:42, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's a picture of him in his wheelchair on this site. https://burrunjor.com/2016/06/11/cult-actors-8-paul-darrow/ It's a blog, so can't be used as a source in the main article.165.225.80.59 (talk) 16:40, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So what is to be done when a blog is the only source of obviously correct info? 193.132.104.10 (talk) 15:18, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As it was an IP and there was only 'some discussion group with no sources' (which I cannot find now) and PD's website said nothing best to query the category. Jackiespeel (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Several blogs and other informal online sources have the information in varying depth so 'some mention' should be made here (as it may be a long time to obits). 193.132.104.10 (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So how will 'what is obviously correct information' be added to the article?

Easy: find a reliable source. If not, it can't be added. You can't make 'some mention' of something that is unsourced. I could have seen him yesterday and he could have told me the whole story, but I still couldn't put it in here. Btljs (talk) 20:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While 'blogs and other conversation pieces' have their limitations there is the photograph (with Jacqueline Pearce in the background).

There must be other cases where 'there are presently only less than fully reliable sources' applies (and some cases where 'blogs and similar unreliable sources say...' #is# of significance. 193.132.104.10 (talk) 15:10, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the blog in question has been updated - and the issue I mentioned earlier this month is likely to apply on occasion. Jackiespeel (talk) 15:06, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He is one of the contestants on Pointless Celebrities today, 27th October 2018, and is visibly in a wheelchair with no legs. I would hope that would count as a reliable source. 2A02:C7F:3C00:9900:5876:4169:DE87:420A (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Was the sequel produced in 2016? Jackiespeel (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is some discussion of the possible sequel on the relevant Wikipedia page: [[1]] 2.28.151.225 (talk) 10:27, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would changing the text here to '... for which a sequel has been planned' cover the eventualities? Jackiespeel (talk) 10:41, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]