Talk:Nancy Brinker

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nancy Brinker article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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.

Biography

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

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Judaism Low‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles 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.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Jewish Women Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish 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.Jewish WomenWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish WomenTemplate:WikiProject Jewish WomenJewish Women articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Suspicious Self Serving IP Edits

The following IP addresses have made numerous and significant self-aggrandizing changes to this page and other pages for Norman & Nancy Brinker. I put it that edits done by the following IP addresses were either done directly by Nancy/Norman Brinker, or that they have directed others to make such changes: 207.179.232.33, 98.214.119.95, 173.115.106.237, 70.5.187.1, 74.73.171.166, and possibly others. These edits need to be reversed, neutral point of view restored and the pages locked so that users without a registered account can not contribute. To emphasize, it is Wikipedia policy that 1) Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion and 2) individuals who are the subject of articles (and their affiliates) ARE NOT ALLOWED TO EDIT THEIR OWN ARTICLES, especially for purposes of self promotion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.140.113.150 (talk) 17:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:SusanGKomenWeb.jpg

The image Image:SusanGKomenWeb.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

File:SusanGKomenWeb.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Air Force One

Traveling on Air Force One is relevant because in the past the Chief of Protocol would travel on the Presidential Support Aircraft instead of Air Force One. There are many AP pictures of Brinker boarding and deplaning Air Force One which makes it relevant. --74.73.171.166 (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This and other recent edits make it seem as if someone is trying to make Brinker look as awesome as possible, and doing it via anonymous IP edits, often making the same edits over and over, despite the objections of numerous veteran wikipedia editors. I object to the change. Many people travel on Air Force One, and it's simply not relevant, unless there is some special importance to the fact. It sounds as if we are supposed to think that the past President thought that Brinker was golly, just awesome, and that's not relevant here. Tb (talk) 05:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Tb; the fact that she traveled on Air Force One is not notable by itself. It implies something about her relationship with Bush, but an implication is not sufficient enough to justify the inclusion of the fact. If there were a reliable source that wrote an article about their relationship and mentioned the travel arrangements as evidence, that might make a difference. But so far, I haven't seen such a piece. --Sfmammamia (talk) 06:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you people have a life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.214.119.95 (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having trouble understanding how this comment helps improve the encyclopedia, all the edits by that user seem to be geared to making Nancy Brinker look just as golly totally awesome as possible. Feh. Tb (talk) 01:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this should be added back in this article based on the May 12th Washington Post article referenced here. [1] --62.50.220.117 (talk) 15:37, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've improved the sentence structure for this edit but removed "Air Force One" as I don't think it's needed. --188.60.63.14 (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chief of Protocol

Someone has some issue with this topic. I found a article posted on state.gov that closes this controversy once and for all about Brinker's expanded role within the Department. While the State Dept has removed virtually every trace of evidence of the previous Administration from the state.gov domain it seems like this article remains and is very relevant. Looks like this issue should now be closed. --207.179.232.33 (talk) 19:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no doubt she created the division--never have. The issue has been two things. First, the self-promotion, or friend-promotion, of the IP editors who are desperate to magnify Brinker's importance everywhere they find her name on Wikipedia. Second, the extent to which they are concerned to make her look uber-competent. I'm sorry that updating the webpage for her own office was a low priority for her. I'm sorry that the Bush Administration didn't think it was important. But still, it is the case, that it wasn't deemed important enough to be visible on the most visible presence of the United States Department of State on the web. This article is not only for things that make Brinker look good, it is for all the things. If the mention of her "expanded role" for the office of protocol is relevant, then it is equally relevant to mention that she did only half the job of expanding it. Tb (talk) 00:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tb, I disagree, so I have removed the sentence you added. We have no way of sourcing that the effort "never" appeared on the State Department's website or interpreting whether that means they weren't notable enough. Websites change all the time, and they are likely to change when a new administration takes over. I think the statements about Brinker expanding the office are adequately sourced now. If you disagree, please discuss that here. If they are adequately sourced, then I believe that the only remaining question is whether those efforts in and of themselves are notable enough for inclusion here. I believe that they are, at least for now. --Sfmammamia (talk) 02:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is this. The IP editors have, I believe, a patently clear conflict of interest problem. I think they should be entirely discounted. (Each of them has a clear pattern of edits entirely focused on Brinker and magnifying her importance in a jillion ways, not just with regard to this particular government office.) That said, I entirely distrust the view that this is some remarkable effort, some wonderful advance, some great new thing in the office of protocol. So yes, there was a new thing. But how many new things? How often? Is this really the kind of change that happens since Black had the job? Or is it, perhaps, the kind of thing that every new chief of protocol does? The question is key to how the information should be presented. Tb (talk) 04:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and in response to the edit summary comment: normally, non-mention is not notable, indeed! But here we are talking about the US Department of State and its documentation of its own structure, on its own website. Frankly, I doubt that the new wonderful amazing outreach effort even has the same rank and importance as the other long-established divisions, and the use of "division" in a press report may well just mean a guy with a desk. If we discount the representation of the IP editors, all we have is that she did a thing. Perhaps these things have been done for years without all the trumpery. (And isn't it clear that we are dealing with someone here who is relentless in trumpery?) Tb (talk) 04:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree that the IP editor(s)' edits appear to have bias, I think we deal with that in the usual ways -- insisting that his/her/their inserts be reliably sourced, neutrally phrased, and notable enough for inclusion (IP editor(s), please take notice of this!) I'm with you on this and have been editing out puffery (trumpery, as you put it...I had to look that one up!), particularly uncited, where I have found it. I think the two sentences in question are relatively neutrally worded, based on sources and notable enough. If you disagree, my suggestion is that we tweak the sentences, rather than removing them entirely or contradicting them. Frankly, once Brinker gets another job and there's more to say about her career, this so-called expansion will likely fade into recentism and be removable, but for now I don't see harm in letting it stay. --Sfmammamia (talk) 17:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's fair enough by me. Tb (talk) 20:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found a nice article on a special event at Blair House related to breast cancer awareness. I felt it was relevant and additive to the article especially since the White House was illuminated in pink. --98.214.119.95 (talk) 13:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We have to be careful, of course, the Chief of Protocol's job is doing events in general, and we can't list them all. But this one does stand out. Tb (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

marriages

Brinker was married to Norman Brinker, though the text doesn't make clear that they were divorced many years ago, and he has since remarried. in addition, his article says that she has a son Eric by a "previous marriage". We should either exclude mention of Norman Brinker here, or include a more complete marital history for a biography. Tb (talk) 17:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brinker continues to serve on the Komen board and Norman adopted Brinker's son from her previous marriage. Norman Brinker remains one of Nancy's closest advisors and from what I found on Google photos where photographed together as late as 2007 at a black tie fundraiser. Nancy and Norman continue to manage business interests together. Brinker's company is a major funder for Komen. Until we can find more sources for all this I believe we just keep it as is unless other editors object. --74.73.171.166 (talk) 14:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you think we should leave it unclear? You didn't answer anything of my question, but raised a bunch of irrelevant questions. What you say is all interesting, and if sourced, would be appropriate for the article. Interestingly, I can't see much indication at all that they ever "manage[d] business interests together"; all the sources for Norman Brinker's business interests in general do not mention Nancy. And this "one of Nancy's closest advisors"; I have to ask, how do you know that? Are you a personal friend? Tb (talk) 18:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've clarified this text. Since you know about who are Nancy's closest advisors, I'm sure you know the name of her former husband. Are you interested in improving the encyclopedia? Tb (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to revert back some of the changes. Restaurant owner is a little simplistic and I think the previous version by another author is better. He had over 1,000 restaurants, invented the salad bar, and the concept of casul dining. A little more than a "Restaurant owner" Please don't be so angry and biased. Thank you for respecting Wikipedia standards. --74.73.171.166 (talk) 19:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've been asked repeatedly to declare any conflict of interest you may have. I'll ask again; do you have any particular connection to any of the Brinkers? Tb (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No conflict. I'm not a Brinker. I wish. I once worked for the State Dept. but do not have ties. Just interested in knowing people are representing her fairly and using sources to reference her and following Winkipedia standards. I'll ask you to do the same. Thanks. --74.73.171.166 (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your only edits are about Brinker, to make her look, golly shucks, just awesome all the time. And the "I wish" suggests more admiration. I see that you have picked up the word "trumpery". It means self-congratulatory unverifiable, in principle, statements, like "impresario" or "best ever" or "beautiful hairdo" or whatever. A neutral, flat statement, that someone has remarried, is relevant and certainly not trumpery. It doesn't make Norman Brinker look amazing, it does not trumpet him. Please don't just toss around jargon without the meaning. So the question is: why do you think the re-marriage should be unmentioned? I think the reason for your objection is that it is unflattering to Nancy Brinker that Norman Brinker has moved on to a different wife. But perhaps you have a principled objection. Can you please make it? Tb (talk) 19:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personal

I've created a new Personal section which I belive cleans up this article. It also gives the other IP editor and registered users a chance to fight out whatever is going on above without disrupting the rest of the article.--173.115.106.237 (talk) 03:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

patronage

It's clear that Brinker's nomination as Ambassador to Hungary had a lot to do with her substantial contributions in 2000. It is normal for ambassadorships to be patronage appointments, there is no shame in such at all, and it's important, I think, that the article be clear about it, to avoid the false impression that there is some foreign policy experience which led to Brinker's appointments. Tb (talk) 05:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tb, I have to disagree with you on this. Brinker was selected specifically to help led women's health initiatives in Eastern Europe. While they have always been donors I don't think it needs to be listed twice. Are you trying to make some point? I'm going to clean up and post references related to the health initiates. Thanks for your contributions. I would like to hear from other users before you revert back my changes. --68.247.222.115 (talk) 13:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added in the term political appointee and sourced it with a article and quote from Bush on why she received the appointment. While you could suggest patronage the suggestion that she maybe bought the post is unclear and a fine line given her resume. --68.247.222.115 (talk) 13:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the term "political appointee" clarifies that she is not a Career Foreign Service Officer and takes away any biases. None of us are privy to all the background of her selection. Was it because she was a personal friend, was it due to her husbands donations? Others raised much much more from the references I see in this article but never received any appointments political or otherwise. I'm glad to see more sources are being added to take away some of the controversy. --70.5.187.1 (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with the current wording and sourcing. Unless we find a reliable source that explicitly connects the donations with the appointments, it is original research to so state and implicitly downplays the other skills and strengths she may have brought to her public service roles. --Sfmammamia (talk) 19:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Susan G. Komen for the Cure

TB once again has a beef claiming that Brinker is not responsible for the creation and success of Komen. He has become golly jesus christ just crazy about this. The source in question was clarified and is clearly sourced. Give it a rest. I understand you have a personal beef with her due to your affiliation with the anit-abortion movement. Please give it a rest. DO NOT MAKE FUTHER CHANGES without others giving their unbiased thoughts.

Huh? I'm pro-choice, though I'm not sure what that has to do with it. I stand by statement: the cited refs identify Brinker as responsible for the creation of the Komen foundation. A simple search for her name shows that the sources identify the Komen foundation as having any particular connection to Brinker's leadership. It is a common fallacy to attribute all the successes of an organization to the leader, but it is just that: a fallacy. It is incorrect for the article to read as if Brinker did those things which the Komen foundation did, and the sources do not support such a reading. If you disagree, please cite the specific sections that you think claim for Brinker the responsibility for the foundation's successes. And, you seem to be unclear about Wikipedia's policies. It is your change that requires consensus if there is an objection (and I've made one). I've asked you to document the claim, and WP:BLP is especially strict. Tb (talk) 07:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that this entry has been scrubbed of the entire scandal that ensued while Brinker was CEO of Komen. It also does not mention the ousize salary she earned at the end of her tenure, when it was clear she was leaving. There is no explanation from that, but then, there seems to be no negative information at all in this puff piece that looks like it was written by Brinker's publicist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve A (talk • contribs) 21:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree about not mentioning any of the Komen/Handel issues with Planned Parenthood funding. Did this not happen?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:CA00:1D0:4D35:15E0:CA79:81E3 (talk) 18:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Ambassador to Hungary

Wow, drama with the other IP editor(s)! I've added a section on Brinker's influence on Hungarian art. I was at her show at the Forbes Gallery yesterday in New York which prompted me to see if anything had been added to her article. I went ahead and added it in and found a number of sources. Open to any ideas to improving this as it seems to be big part of her story. On a personal note, the collection was impressive if you are into art --72.59.10.107 (talk) 16:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look at some of the recent edits and while there is something funky going on with TB and the other IP editor(s) I will say it's much improved since I last looked at this. I've made a few more clean-ups which I've noted in the edit summary. Thanks! --72.59.10.107 (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome!!! --74.73.171.166 (talk) 17:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice improvements. All the references on public appearances are particularly good and important leg-work. And, the bit about Hungarian art is interesting and a nice enrichment of the article. Tb (talk) 20:32, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other government service

Brinker's work with Michelle Obama to support the White House efforts to promote Women's History Month was widely reported on CNBC and numerous Washington DC media outlets. I think this is interesting to the article as it shows Brinker is not just a partisan and was selected by a Democratic administration to represent their agenda. Washington DC media reported that in fact she was the ONLY Republican to join the First Lady on this ongoing project that is supporting DC schools. --65.34.225.195 (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me a trivial role in comparison to her other appointments in this section. When she gets appointed by President Obama to something of higher visibility and importance, that would would be worthy of mention. See WP:RECENT. --Sfmammamia (talk) 14:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where did Nancy Brinker get One Billion Dollars?

This entry fails to explain how Nancy Brinker obtained ONE BILLION DOLLARS to create a foundation. This is not a minor point. There are only a few people in the world who have ONE BILLION DOLLARS.

23:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC) Borealis.seven (talk) 23:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm, Komen has raised and spent over one billion dollars over a 30 year period. It didn't start with a billion dollars. And I'm no fan of Brinker's, for the record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.169.132 (talk) 04:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Honourary Degree

Well, I just saw this wonderful person recieve an honourary degree from Mount Sinai Medical School yesterday at my sister-in-law's med school graduation. Should it be put in if I find a source for it? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie Say Shalom! 05:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article is missing most of the first 36 years of her life

There is a lot missing, notably the date of her first marriage, her schools, and every job she had since leaving college and before starting the charity which bears her sister's name. Previous jobs or career are really essential for an article of this size. Her own web page has vague mentions of a career in broadcasting, but it's very sketchy. When I see an article with such a large omission as this, it makes me wonder if it's been nobbled, but there doesn't seem to be anything shameful in this early career according to this online biography. I've taken that info and added it to the article, but I think more work needs to be done on this lady's early life to make it complete. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 08:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:11, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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 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).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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 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).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:00, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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).

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) 05:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090817140800/http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/index.php?ntid=115744&ntpid=5 to http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/index.php?ntid=115744&ntpid=5
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130208091929/http://www.twu.edu/twhf/tw-brinker.asp to http://www.twu.edu/twhf/tw-brinker.asp
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nab.org/AM/PrinterTemplate.cfm?Section%3DService_to_America1%26CONTENTID%3D13661%26TEMPLATE%3D%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dienviro.com/index1.aspx?BD=18131
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://pvnm.ag/promisechat
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100730221934/http://www.more.com/2050/18109-her-sister-s-keeper to http://www.more.com/2050/18109-her-sister-s-keeper

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:33, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 18:11, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Nancy Brinker. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 23:27, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]