Talk:Sami Brady

IMBD and Soap Central as references

Neither passes standards to be references and have been removed. The Hollywood.com reference link states 'FAN SITE' upon arrival and has also been removed. Find reliable sources, not fan sites. KellyAna (talk) 03:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE, SC and IMDB are used as sources all over the place. Is any of the information objectionable? It's all dates and other info, nothing controversial. As far as Hollywood.com, it's undergoing maintenance right now, but it's not just some blog. I'm going to check it again later and see if I agree with your assessment.

Removing reasonable references that no one is going to challenege is counter-productive to the project. This article is just a huge plot summary without them, and should and will be deleted. Are you kidding me?? TheRhani (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, who says there should be no references in an infobox? You love to make up rules, don't you. Information should have sources no matter where it appears, especially things like birthdates. A reader may look at the infobox before they read the article, and the source should be there. TheRhani (talk) 04:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

And finally, "we" don't put "half-cousins," YOU do. There is no such thing, you have half-siblings and then from there they are just cousins and nephews etc. The "half" only counts because you're comparing parentage. But I'll leave it so at least you can feel like you're right about something. TheRhani (talk) 04:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice personal attack. I've seen MANY soap editors put half-cousins and the characters even refer to them as such. I wouldn't have started if they weren't there in the first place. By the way, keep on point. This isn't about the infobox.KellyAna (talk) 02:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

KellyAna, I have to agree with TheRhani here. Since when are SC and IMDb completely unreliable? None of this info is controversial, the threshold is usually whether or not the info is likely to be challenged. I feel that by dismissing these resources in general, we are limiting future improvement of other articles. — TAnthony^Talk 04:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

You are not serious? For the Theresa Lopez-Fitzgerald page IMDB isn'treliable but for here it is? DOUBLE STANDARD??? I've been told a dozen times IMDB should not be used here and SC never reached a consensus. If IMDB is reliable here, then it is reliable for NO CRANE on Theresa's name. Which is it and let's just bring it up to the whole community otherwise it stays "unreliable" as it is a user edited website.KellyAna (talk) 02:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I just stopped by to state that Hollywood.com is a very reliable source. It seems that fan sites are also a part of it, but they are not directly a part of it, and certainly not for reporting celebrity biographies. And for reporting news such as the first lesbian kiss in American soap opera history, it's also reliable. Flyer22 (talk) 05:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

As it turns out, the entry at Yahoo.com matched word-for-word, so I used that instead because it seems more reliable. I'm not sure if they are co-owned or ... the bio at Hollywood.com did not seem user-added, however, though it is currently unavailable. TheRhani (talk) 05:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Nah. Yahoo.com is not any more reliable than Hollywood.com. And, again, Hollywood.com is reliable. Flyer22 (talk) 10:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and a lot of websites copy each other when it comes to reporting biographies and news. Flyer22 (talk) 10:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

See this: contributor/996274 on the Yahoo info. That is a number assigned to fans and wanna bes to edit Yahoo's information. Get some real sources or don't reverence this stuff. Try TV Guide, Newsweek, MSNBC. KellyAna (talk) 03:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

There may be inaccuracies at IMDb and SC, but they have not been established as unreliable; there are inaccuracies in the soap magazines and even typographical errors in the shows' own credits, I have a screen grab or two to prove it. As far as the Theresa issue, I never said that IMDB was unreliable, I believe it was you who said "Even IMDB, which agrees with my information, isn't a usable source." I don't know why you insist on decrying these two sites, they are two of the few sources we have.

Regardless, if there is no information here you are challenging, I'm not sure why this is such an issue. Without these references the article is just a plot summary. It's not as if we're saying "Sami Brady is a jerk" and crediting a blog. I think perhaps you are being a little strict here. It would be one thing if you were challenging some of the facts, like the "Crane" issue — perhaps the sites cannot be considered the final word on anything, but for the date Sami was born onscreen? I think we can assume accuracy to some degree here. — TAnthony^Talk 03:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, KellyAna is right that a lot of editors here often state that IMDB is unreliable and yank it out of articles. They act as though it is completely unreliable. But as you say, TheRhani and TAnthony, in this case...it's not being used for anything controversial or highly contested.

As for SC (Soap Central.com), we, as a project, did reach consensus on that. However, that consensus was more that it is a reliable source for news information. Flyer22 (talk) 03:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I shouldn't have used SC as a title and have changed it. SC stands for too many things, including but not limited to the "Lumi Megasite" Second Chances. If those editing insist on using Soapcentral, change the reference name so there is no confusion. I already read on Second Chances that "Wikipedia is using OUR initials in their article" and that shows bias and it makes me ill. KellyAna (talk) 03:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Re IMDB, it is being used for Soap Opera Digest awards, that can and should be questioned as a source and the originator of the award has lists which should be used as the reference, not IMDB. KellyAna (talk) 04:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding using IMDb for the awards: yes, SOD's lists may be used and perhaps may be considered more "reliable." However, I take issue with your simply removing the IMDb references out of hand and replacing them with a "need refs" tag (Or removing it altogether, as you did previously). We both know it will most like go uncited for a very long time; a "weak" source is far better than none at all. If you feel this strongly about the source and the article itself, I cannot understand why you wouldn't take it upon yourself to provide the SOD source yourself — especially since you are pretty much the only one questioning IMDb's validity in general. The info about Sweeney's awards and the other quotes about the character that The Rhani added constitute the only real-world context the article has. These help assert the character's notability, and without them the article is, plain and simple, deserving of deletion per WP standards. The Project's main goal is to improve soap articles with the idea of making them "deserving to exist" and not eligible for deletion. I would argue that one of its goals is not making sure every tiny detail of every character and show is specified, as many editors seem to think. I would ask you and every other member of the Project to recognize and remember that. The only reason I even got involved in this article was because I felt as though some of your edits were jeopardizing this article as I have described, and that your justifications might influence other editors to edit along the same lines. I have only the Project and its articles in mind. — TAnthony^Talk 15:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll find the lists, I did once and know where to look for the links. I am far from the only one on all of Wikipedia that says IMDB is not a valid source. I've had it removed and have been told not to use it again and that's what I'm making sure happens. And don't lie, you didn't get involved for reasons you say. You got involved for reasons you said on your talk page and others. Don't lie, it's an unflattering habit. KellyAna (talk) 16:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your edit summary: Take all the issue you want. IMDB is not a valid source) I've pretty much washed my hands of this article. I encourage you to remove all of the new information you feel is badly sourced, but do not be shocked or surprised on the day the article is tagged for deletion per Wikipedia:Notability. — TAnthony^Talk 17:00, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Lie?? I saw TheRhani's additions to the article, made my own small edit here before immediately commenting on her talk page here. This was a day before you got involved and reverted her edits and two days before you commented on her talk page here. I was clearly watching the article before this thing began. — TAnthony^Talk 17:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, both of you, I realize that you are frustrated. But from where I sit, BOTH of you have good points. Now both of you, please, chill out? You are both letting your tempers getting the better of you, and from what I've seen of both your histories, you're not normally like this. If necessary, I will protect the article to enforce a time-out, but I'd rather not do that.

From what I can see, the main points are these:

• KellyAna believes that IMDB is a bad source, and should not be used to source notable information. She think that any refs to IMDB should be removed and replaced with better citations. She's right.
• TAnthony thinks that the article is in danger of deletion, and that removing IMDB would remove even the small bit of "real world" reference that this article even has. He has a point too.

Per WP:V, KellyAna has the stronger case, but she is not presenting it well, because as soon as she resorts to uncivil comments, and accuses other editors of lying, they tune out on the rest of what she's saying. But it is true that the responsibility of providing a source rests on the editor wanting to include the information, not the editor wanting to remove it. If KellyAna is challenging information, and there's no reliable source for the information, that part of the article can be deleted. In effect, she's compromising by requesting a better source, rather than just deleting the information outright.

In summary, I am again asking both of you to calm down and actually listen to each other. If you can figure out a way to communicate and compromise, the article will end up stronger as a result, and since you're probably both going to be interacting on many other soap articles in the future, it would behoove both of you to figure out how to work through conflict. I am sure that you both have strengths which could benefit the other editor, if you could stop seeing each other as evil incarnate. However you work things out, I don't really care, except that you must do it in a civil way. If you can stay civil, and avoid edit-warring, then feel free to disagree with each other as much as you want. :) But if you're just going to insult each other, then I or some other admin is going to have to wade in with admin tools. And I'd really rather avoid doing that. --Elonka 19:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

At the same time, Sami’s plot summary has not been updated. I wanted to understand the whole kidnap scenario, but there is nothing at all about it, or anything else recent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:4301:ADC0:7924:4743:77CA:5439 (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Truce

Hiya, I was asked to take a look here, as I am an uninvolved administrator. I see that there's been a conflict for awhile, and that some of the talkpage discussions are deteriorating a bit. I would recommend that everyone please at least glance at Wikipedia:Civility.

I'm confident that everyone here has at least one thing in common, in that you're all interested in improving this article. There just seems to be disagreement about how to improve it. Do you think it's possible to work things out? I recommend picking one specific area of contention, defining it clearly here at talk, and trying to see if you can find a compromise that everyone can live with. If you can't, then I would recommend filing a Request for Comment to get more opinions into the mix, to see if you can figure out where the consensus is.

Would it be possible to declare a truce, and start over with more civil communications, that concentrate on the article, and not the other editors? Thanks, --Elonka 05:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Whatever is decided with this article, it most certainly needs cleanup. Even with references, at the moment it is just plot. Flyer22 (talk) 03:24, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Info on SoapOperaDigest.com

There seems to be a lot of potentially useful information about Allison and Sami at SoapOperaDigest.com's Allison Sweeney page, including their bio of Allison and some interviews with her and some of her costars. I think the site can be considered a good source? I'll try to add what I can when I have time, but hopefully in the meantime another ambitious editor will jump in. Thanks. — TAnthony^Talk 18:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I added the reference to the awards section particularly because the number previously listed was wrong and I would think SOD would know how many awards they had given her. KellyAna (talk) 19:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Misspelling

{{editprotected}}

The word bulimic is spelled as "bulemic" in this article, and the page is protected from editing.

Fixed. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:24, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Allie's name is misspelt as Alli and the page is protected from editing.

2009

In January 2009 Sami gave birth to her and EJ's second child together, a baby girl, but Nicole, EJ's fiance and Sami's arch enemy switched EJ and Sami's baby with the baby she was going to adopt from a teenage girl named Mia. Nicole and EJ give "their" daughter the name Sydney Ann DiMera, and Sami give "her" daughter the name Grace Rafaela Brady because Sami thinks that it eas by the grace of Good that she concieved and give birth to her daughter.

On March 19 it was confirmed by the priest on Sydney´s baptism that her middle name is Anne, and on March 27 it was confirmed by the priest on Grace´s baptism that her middle name was Rafaela.

I need to remind you that deleting content from talk pages is considered vandalism. I must also warn you, again, for the 50th time, that making up fake baby names and placing unverifiable content on these pages is VANDALISM. If you put something on this site, you MUST source it with VERIFIABLE information. Why do you think all these articles are blocked from IP editing? It is because YOU keep vandalizing them by adding false information. I realize in this case, you were correct about the baby names, but you still have not sourced it, and you added MONTHS before it was revealed on screen. That is against the rules of the site. PLEASE contact me so I can explain the rules to you. That way, your contributions will not be deleted anymore, and you can help us improve these articles. If you continue to add false/unverifiable information, you CAN and WILL be blocked from editing wikipedia. Please let me know if I can help in any way. Rm994 (talk) 02:29, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

As always, plot summary is way out of date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.193.59 (talk) 20:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

editsemiprotected

Grace Brady died on June 8, 2009. Sami said it in Grace's Euilogy and it say on her tombstone.

editsemiprotected

Grace Brady died on June 8, 2009. Sami said it in Grace's Euilogy and it say on her tombstone.

editsemiprotected

Grace Brady died on June 8, 2009. Sami said it in Grace's Euilogy and it say on her tombstone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timv94 (talk • contribs) 06:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Confusing

Under Early Life start of 2nd paragraph. "After Sami had switched the blood test of the baby, " What baby are we talking about? Poor transition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flight Risk (talk • contribs) 03:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Sami's middle name

I've been watching some of the older episodes of Days, am currently watching the beginnings of E.J. (back when he went by Wells), and her middle name was brought up. Is her middle name spelled "Gene" or "Jean"? E.J. brought it up and he mentioned it was with a "J". Just curious. Muketsu37 (talk) 02:10, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

It is spelled "Gene". Marlena and Roman named here after Marlena's ex-husband and dear friend Eugene Bradford, hence the Gene. Many people get confused about this :) Allukka (talk) 14:53, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm going with "Jean" since Alison Sweeney wrote it as Sami's full name in her book, All The Days Of My Life (so Far). I'm going go with the actress spelling, since she is one who reads the scripts and is her(!) then some unsourced "Gene". - Ms Imperfection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ms Imperfection. (talk • contribs) 15:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Step brother

Can Brady Black be added as step brother too? Oliviagreeneyes13 (talk) 14:10, 2 January 2021 (UTC)