Talk:Pamela Rogers Turner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pamela Rogers Turner article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents 1 New Picture of Pam Rogers 2 Sentence 3 Criticism 4 Dead link 5 No image 6 Relationship???

[edit] New Picture of Pam Rogers

I inserted a new picture of Pam. The old one was poorly cropped - somebody's nose was sticking out on the right side of the picture. David Cruise 04:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sentence

Can they really restrict her right to give interviews? Seems something along those lines would be illegal. Hempeater 09:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

She's a criminal. A HOT criminal, but still, a criminal. Criminals have practically no rights. Donmega60645 16:08, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh, she's only a criminal because the law, written to protect girls in the first place, gets tangled up with the progressive views on sexual equality. The result is clearly ridiculous. Time to re-evaluate the initial assumptions?69.107.89.219 05:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.107.89.219 (talk) 05:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

If it was a part of her plea agreement (that is, her HOT plea agreement), then it would be a restriction she agreed to willingly. Pleas in such HOT cases frequently prohibit defendants from profiting from their notoriety (cf, the Carolina Pathers lesbian cheerleader bar fight). 75.22.194.152 19:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Is the criticism section really relevant? It does not seem that a local DJ in another city and state pointing out that the rape would not be forcible constitutes real criticism. Also, based on the info. it appears this is a comedy oriented show so the "criticism" is probably not meant to be serious.66.72.215.225

I've removed it. The argument itself is more suited to the article on statutory rape.--Nonpareility 03:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually I envy the boy :)) --Brand спойт 17:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.pamelarogers.org
  • In Pamela Rogers Turner on Sun Jul 16 21:30:53 2006, Socket Error: (-3, 'Temporary failure in name resolution')
  • In Pamela Rogers Turner on Mon Jul 17 17:45:22 2006, Socket Error: (-3, 'Temporary failure in name resolution')
  • In Pamela Rogers Turner on Thu Jul 27 01:24:48 2006, Socket Error: (-3, 'Temporary failure in name resolution')

---

maru (talk) contribs 05:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks fine as of this moment 75.22.231.145 20:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No image

Article needs an image. --Margrave1206 23:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It appears there was one, and it was deleted because of uncertain copyright status. Perhaps find a fair use image and upload it.--Crossmr 17:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

If ever an article was SCREAMING for a picture... :P - AbstractClass 07:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relationship???

I feel it is irresponsible journalism and grossly incorrect to say that this woman had a "3-month relationship with a teenage boy."

This is sexual battery, statutory rape, and sick!

If I as a 30 year-old man had manipulated a teenage student of mine into sexual immorality and sent her dirty text messages, graphic videos of myself dancing in a thong, ect. Would you call that a "relationship" or would I be a sexual predator?

THAT IS NOT A RELATIONSHIP!

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.111.61.230 (talk) 06:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

When two people interact with each other in any way, that is a "relationship". Personal distaste for the basis of it does not change that fact. Though if you have a wording suggestion that is both accurate and non-judgemental, please feel welcome to change it. Danthemankhan 18:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC)