Biography: Actors and Filmmakers Start‑class

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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Mid-importance).

Doctor Who Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lousy picture, can someone get a better one? james_anatidae 07:48, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone find a more up-to-date and flattering picture of Lis? There must be plenty of possibilities what with her recent appearance on Blue Peter and of course the forthcoming Dr Who appearance. The current picture on this site really doesn't do her justice.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaunt (talk • contribs) 12:42, 25 April 2006

Khaosworks - thanks for uploading the new picture. Definitely an improvement on the older one. :-)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaunt (talk • contribs) 13:21, 28 April 2006

Also, can someone get a picture from her Doctor Who days, possible from the show itself? I'm sure there are plenty of screenshots on Wikipedia. --Howdybob 01:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can, but it's not needed here for this article - there's a couple of shots of her at Sarah Jane Smith, which is a more pertinent location for them. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 01:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's relevant here; it should go in the section about her time on Doctor Who. --Howdybob 05:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added a biobox, persondata and a picture I found hidden on wikipedia (the copyright status of which I am extremely unsure.) What do you think? El Zoof 04:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:scifiradioguy, all the text you added appears to be copied directly from [1]. Can you please confirm you are the author or have been permitted to add this, or else the additional material will need to be removed. (Khaosworks has rewritten some of it so the rest can be reworked too if necessary.) Tim! (talk) 08:11, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the third paragraph of ‘later career’ it used to state “Sladen was very heartbroken when Jon Pertwee, who was her closest friend, on Doctor Who” it now states "Sladen revealed in an interview with the BBC that in May of 1996 when Jon Pertwee (her close friend) died, she was heartbroken and cried for weeks." which is a more accurate reflection of the qoute listed in the references section. this still needs to be cited, which i do not know how to do, and fleshed out into more than just an extremly small paragraph or possibly removed altogether.--Jacobpaige (talk) 09:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i've now read the article in question and have come to realise that the whole paragraph was a complete distortion of her actual words. the relevent paragraph in the interview reads "Tom Baker was always very sweet to me. It was in our interests to get on, but it was never forced. I adore seeing him now. No-one else understands what it was like. I was very sad when Jon Pertwee died. Doing the two radio stories (Paradise of Death and The Ghosts of N-Space) had brought a great deal of enjoyment to us both and given us a new relationship. We had both mellowed. Although I hadn't seen him much since then, when he died I realised how much I missed him because he was my Doctor. If I go to a convention now, Ian isn't there and Jon isn't there and you feel a bit lonely! Jon and Tom were two very different gentlemen in the way they worked – Jon enjoyed being much more protective towards the companion – and I liked the difference." Which implies that they liked each other but weren't particularly close at the time of his death.--Jacobpaige (talk) 10:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed File:Sarahjane.jpg from the infobox because its use there fails Wikipedia:NFCC. 68.167.191.189 (talk) 00:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm amazed it lasted so long actually. At least now we finally have an up-to-date, free image we can use.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:36, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who, K-9 and Company Sarah Jane Smith title:elisabeth sladen's sja profile Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (January 2010)

Elisabeth Sladen

Sladen in 2003 Born Elisabeth Claira Heath Sladen 1 February 1948 (1948-02-01) (age 62) Liverpool, England, UK Other name(s) Elizabeth Sladen Occupation Actress, Presenter, Writer Years active 1965-present Spouse(s) Brian Miller (1968-present)

Elisabeth Sladen (born 1 February 1948, Liverpool) is an English actress best known for her role as Sarah Jane Smith in the British television series Doctor Who, K-9 and Company and the current The Sarah Jane Adventures, as well as in various audio stories.

She appeared as a regular on Doctor Who with both Jon Pertwee and Tom Baker, and has reprised the role many times. Sladen has been married since 1968 to actor Brian Miller. Their daughter, Sadie Miller, appeared with her in the range of Sarah Jane Smith audio plays by Big Finish Productions

Brian Miller is elisabeth sladen's husbund.

01 – "Invasion of the Bane" The Sarah Jane Adventures episode Cast Elisabeth Sladen – Sarah Jane Smith Yasmin Paige – Maria Jackson Thomas Knight – Luke Smith Alexander Armstrong – Mr Smith John Leeson – K-9

Guest stars Porsha Lawrence Mavour – Kelsey Hooper Jamie Davis – Davey Joseph Millson – Alan Jackson Juliet Cowan – Chrissie Jackson Konnie Huq and Gethin Jones – Themselves Samantha Bond – Mrs Wormwood

Production Writer Gareth Roberts Russell T Davies Director Colin Teague Script editor Simon Winstone Producer Susie Liggat Executive producer(s) Phil Collinson Russell T Davies Julie Gardner Production code 1.X Series New Year's Day special Length 60 minutes Originally broadcast 1 January 2007 Chronology ? Preceded by Followed by ? — Revenge of the Slitheen

IMDb profile

"Invasion of the Bane" is the first episode of the British science fiction television series The Sarah Jane Adventures. It was originally broadcast on 1 January 2007. Since the series was commissioned before the script for the episode was written, it is not a pilot, but a holiday special, and serves the introductory functions of a pilot.[1]

The episode focuses upon a thirteen year old girl, Maria Jackson, discovering the existence of aliens. After discovering that the Bane, creators of a soft drink called Bubble Shock!, harbour a destructive secret, she teams up with investigative journalist Sarah Jane Smith to prevent their plans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.208.230 (talk) 21:18, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that after moving to London Elisabeth found big city life "a bit of an adjustment". According to the previous paragraph she had moved from Manchester. Manchester is no small town, so she had adjusted from big city life to big city life? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.76.52 (talk) 09:35, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I altered Lis's year of birth to 1946, because that is what is stated in publicly available records in the UK. The probable explanation is that right at the beginning of her career, Lis told a little white lie about her age, to help her start at Liverpool Playhouse as a student actor. The incorrect birth date has been stated on the Internet for at least ten years, and has been repeated in many places as a fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.21.153 (talk) 08:32, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering what is correct to record? The date of birth the individual has used for a number of years or the actual date of birth as recorded at the time of birth? The records show that Elizabeth C H Sladen was born in 1946.138.253.38.130 (talk) 07:22, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't have altered the date of birth to 1948. Sladen died yesterday, and SHE WAS 63! If she was born n 1946, SHE WOULD'VE BEEN 65 AND THAT'S WHAT THE NEWS WOULD'VE SAID! Change it back to 1948! 82.13.79.52 (talk) 16:33, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Her birth was registered in 1946. It is common for actresses to pretend to be younger than they are. The media sometimes report things wrongly. Jim Michael (talk) 17:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Toby Hadoke's obit for Elisabeth Sladen in the Guardian was revised with the 1946 birth date on 21 April 2011. http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/apr/20/doctor-who-fantasy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.199.127 (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just confirmed on BBC News 24 2100 19th April 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.107.56 (talk) 20:02, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have no official source or confirmation, but Twitter is freaking out and saying that Elisabeth Sladen has died. I'm not making any edits to the article itself, but am requesting some help researching and fact-checking to see if this is true. 153.91.136.201 (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder - Justin Bieber "died" not too long ago. Until it hits a major news site (NOT The Onion), it's better we don't mention it. Wikipedia isn't a news site anyway, overall accurate coverage is better than being in perfect touch with current events. Zakhalesh (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it say Justin Bieber? Shouldn't it say Elisabeth Sladen? 82.13.79.52 (talk) 16:35, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware. That's why I'm using the Talk page and asking for help fact checking. I do NOT want to be the guy to falsely update the article itself. (Previous comment was mine, just forgot to log in before making it.) Jivjov (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing it right. It's not unlikely that the death is a memetic hoax, as bigger media companies don't seem to have picked it up. So, I assume it's best to play it safe but keep a lookout for any mainstream coverage. I think Google News might be a good way to find the stories once they're published. Zakhalesh (talk) 19:48, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Got a small mention here, not sure how official it is, but for the record: http://www.digitalspy.com/british-tv/s7/doctor-who/news/a315484/elisabeth-sladen-dies-aged-63.html, also, the official Doctor Who Magazine twitter mentioned it. Jivjov (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There shouldn't be anything added until a reliable source that is accepted by Wikipedia backs it up. The Doctor Who Twitter might be an official Twitter but generally Twitter isn't accepted as a reliable source so I don't think we can use that.--5 albert square (talk) 19:53, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)I'd still wait for a while, but with the official Twitter channel joining in, it's a bit more likely to be real now. I found this as well but it clearly states that it's based on Twitter rumours. Well, in any case, I'm going to bed now, I trust you can decide this along with any other interested editors (or possibly just be bold about it). Nite! Zakhalesh (talk) 19:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, what about the from the Twitter accounts of ITV News and Lorna Cooper? Janers0217 (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) The BBC News channel has reported her death, no doubt an article will appear on the BBC News website soon. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 20:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait till the BBC have published the news page then update the wiki page. --Charlie Huang 【遯卋山人】 20:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13137674 :'( MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 20:21, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alas! I wish that it was only a rumour! But sadly, no. -- Derek Ross | Talk 00:34, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're not alone there. Britmax (talk) 07:39, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow...uh, that was unexpected. If only it were a hoax. Such a shame. And just before the start of Season 32 of Doctor Who as well. I guess they'll edit in a dedication notice. ProtoKun7 (talk) 08:05, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this have an

tag? 65.94.45.160 (talk) 11:20, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It did, but someone removed it, in line with the guidelines on its use. Britmax (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! You undid my edit! That WAS NOT A CLUMSY EDIT! Au contraire! That was in line with other actors look for instance at James Stewart or Clark Gable. Spouse is often mentioned as follows Name (year of marriage - year of end of marriage) (reason end of marriage) -- fdewaele, 20 April 2011, 15:42 CET

Yes, and it's clumsy and unnecessary there as well. Britmax (talk) 13:47, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's merely your personal opinion. Which apparantly many other editors do not share. It's practical to have lenght and reason of the end of marriage(s) in the infobox -- fdewaele, 20 April 2011, 15:52 CET

Well for me it's too much detail for the infobox, which should not be a substitute for the article. I'll do some asking around about it. Britmax (talk) 14:01, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The year of the end of a marriage is always stated in the infobox in cases where the marriage has ended. Jim Michael (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wish it was a hoax, Its soooooo sad that Elisabeth Sladen has died. I can't believe she has gone. :( The odd thing is that Tom Baker is still going and Elisabeth is dead. CBBC may be showing the first episode of series 5 that was filmed before she died. It will be sooooooo sad watching it, knowing that it will be the last 'The Sarah Jane Adventures' episode. :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazyguy21 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Sarah Jane's Alien Files says in the event that Sarah Jane is no longer capable of defending the Earth. Does anyone know if this spinoff was created because the producers were preparing for Sladen's health problems? 65.94.45.160 (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Without official word from the show's producers, anything that we might say about this would be pure speculation. However, most of the obits that I have seen for her describer her as having fought a long battle with cancer. So presumably, the show's producers were well aware of her health problems. JimFarm (talk) 12:35, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where does it say that she had cancer for a long time? All the news reports and obituaries I've read are vague about her cancer. They don't say which organ(s), when she was diagnosed, or where she died. It seems that prior to her death, very few people knew she had cancer. Jim Michael (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Her date of birth should be 1st February 1948, not 1946. Please allow it to be changed.

94.195.33.166 (talk) 16:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Her birth was registered in 1946. Jim Michael (talk) 17:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can she be 63 then? That doesn't make sense. If she was registered as being born in 1946 she would have been 65, not 63. One of the sources even says 1948, not 46. 2.103.122.112 (talk) 17:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many people, and much of the media, wrongly believe she was born in 1948. Jim Michael (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elisabeth Sladen was born in 1948

90.209.198.198 (talk) 17:24, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done See above - her birth was registered in 1946, so she can't have been born any later than that. Jim Michael (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see I'm not the only one to note that this article puts her date of birth in 1946 and age at death at 63. I'm not sure which is correct, but simple math requires that one of these is wrong. She was either born in 1948 or died when she was 65. Fix one of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.220.158.52 (talk) 17:46, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done The article now gives her lifespan as 1946-2011 and age as 65. Jim Michael (talk) 18:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So do we have a consensus that 1946 is her actual birth year? The Birth Index should trump all the media reports since it is a primary official source. -- Gridlock Joe (talk) 12:09, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elisabeth Sladen was born in 1948 not in 1946.

12.139.33.2 (talk) 17:57, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done You need reliable sources for that change. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 17:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talis Kimberley has just released a tribute song to Elisabeth Sladen called "Goodnight Sarah-Jane",[2] if of any interest to editors here. It shouldn't go in the article unless/until secondary sourcing appears. 69.111.194.167 (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't even say where she died. It just says: Died April 19, 2011 (Age 65)

Could someone mention place of death? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.79.52 (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Jim Michael (talk) 16:45, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I do not doubt the good faith of the editors who suggest a 1946 birth date, I am concerned about the quality of the evidence they present.

Specifically: are references behind paywalls (and therefore unverifiable by the overwhelming majority) valid references? If not (and I feel they ought not to be) then we're left with two refs that are as likely to be inaccurate as the vast number of other sources who state a 1948 birthday.

One editor who questioned the '46 DOB was told (fairly curtly) to provide a verifiable source. Why? A source that the majority of readers cannot see/evaluate for themselves is no source at all.

If the official records state a 1946 DOB, fine. But, at the moment, the editors positing a 1946 DOB have not given an openly verifiable source to trump the overwhelming number of sources giving a 1948 date. 86.154.177.24 (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The source being used for the 1946 date is a public record so really is a reliable source, it is not normal for government vital records to be unreliable. Only one register entry exists for an Elisabeth Sladen between 1940 and 1960 and that is an "Elizabeth C.H. Sladen" in Liverpool South in the first quarter of 1946 (General Register Officer register of births for 1946 Jan-Feb-Mar Volume 8B Page No. 303. All the websites like ancestry use the same government source (and any member of the public can ask for a copy of the record from either the General Register Office or the local office so it is a verifiable source). Now the jump is that is the "Elizabeth C.H. Sladen" registered in 1946 is the same person, the only clue would be the Mothers maiden name is given is Trainor. If we have a reliable secondary source that says her mother is Trainor that may provide evidence that the 1946 entry is the same person. As no other Elisabeth Sladen is registered in the same time frame it could be that she was either born in 1948 under a different name or born outside England and Wales. Best we can say from sources is that she was born in 1948 etc but government records indicate she was possibly born in 1946. We dont need to decide which is right we can just present both sets of information and let the reader come to the conclusions. MilborneOne (talk) 18:50, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your very considerate and informative reply. :)

I am not doubting the reliability of official records. I am questioning the fact that the links provided to not allow the majority of editors/readers to see these records, because of the paywall. If there is an openly available online source, then please can we have a link to it. I note your comment re the availability of physical copies of the register entry but 1) that is not practical for most in the UK let alone abroad, and 2) the editors suggesting at 1946 DOB are relying on online sources of very limited use.

If there is no online link to the official records, then we need as a minimum to quote both DOBs or place a Disputed tag in the lead. 86.154.177.24 (talk) 19:06, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you need an online link nothing as far as I know requires references in wikipedia to be online. It is not difficult to get a certificate from https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/default.asp Please assume good faith on other editors providing information, a few years ago all the birth, marriage and death indices were available in London for anybody to inspect and then order the certificate but as a cost saving measure the GRO allowed websites to carry the information and a complete set of GRO Indexes are available to view in microfiche format at Birmingham Central Library, Bridgend Reference and Information Library, The British Library, City of Westminster Archives Centre, London Metropolitan Archives, Greater Manchester County Record Office and Plymouth Central Library. All we need is something like Sladen was born in 1948, although official records indicate she may have been born earlier in 1946 or similar. The issue is not the GRO source but does the source relate to the same person. MilborneOne (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am querying it because the originating editors are making a claim that runs contrary to many other sources. When challenged here on the Talk page, the challenging editor was told to come up with a reliable source... but we are told the only reliable source is behind a paywall or will cost us the price of a certificate.

I repeat - a source that is not freely available to all readers is not a source at all.

May I assume there is no online source? If so, I'll begin an RfD. 86.154.177.24 (talk) 19:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although I am trying to make the situation clear I am still not sure why you doubt the other editors, have not been involved in the edits dont have an axe to grind either way and came along in good faith and found the same information as the other editors. I also explained clearly how it can be used as source. Just to use your phrase - I repeat no requirement on wikipedia for sources to be online. MilborneOne (talk) 19:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please withdraw your accusation suggesting I doubt editors' goodwill. Line one of my first para: "I do not doubt the good faith of the editors who suggest a 1946 birth date" and I continue to hold that view. Your suggestion is, itself contrary to WP:AGF

I also have no axe to grind (how could anyone? We're discussing a dead actress's DOB.) nor have I edited.

For the sake of clarity: I doubt the validity currently provided source online source which is, in reality, useless for the majority.

If the source is not available freely online, the link is useless and should be re-worked to prove sufficient information to allow readers to access hardcopy of the info. It is not in dispute that the vast majority of other sources suggest a 1948 DOB, and this should therefore be acknowledged in the lead (or perhaps infobox, although that may be rather messy.)

An RfD seems inevitable. Pity, as they are something of a time-waste. 86.154.177.24 (talk) 20:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about any accusations I was just frustrated at repeating the same comment, the point I had was that the online sources are just a copy of the General Register Office index entry and that is what should be referenced not the online websites. The GRO reference allows you to reference the appropriate index. Interestingly the Guardian has changed the dob to 1946, they are a reliable source http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/apr/20/doctor-who-fantasy. MilborneOne (talk) 20:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apology cheerfully accepted and thank you!

I agree with you re the Guardian. Might I suggest the removal of the paywall-protected links? Sadly, I have to ask you to do this as I cannot access my full account from work. Your choice. :)

63 or 65, she looked amazing for either age, and an inspiration for those of us determined to tackle middle-age spread.

I do hope Fate has no plans to take yet more childhood away this year. Losing Nick Courtney and now Lis Sladen in quick succession... well, I guess that's wandering into personal chit-chat of a sad nature. I'll shut up. :( 86.154.177.24 (talk) 20:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paywall ref changed to GRO reference. MilborneOne (talk) 20:40, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For those who dislike the paywall, here is a free site for English & Welsh births, marriages & deaths, but they haven't totally completed the year 1946 yet: http://www.freebmd.org.uk/ This whole discussion reminds me of the current one surrounding Taio Cruz, who is listed as being born in 1980 in official records while fans insist he was born in 1982 or 1983 with his stage name and will not accept the ancestry paywall (see his discussion page). And the media cited just feed off each other, citing the incorrect year! Ravenscroft32 (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can people actually think it was 1946? It has been stated by the BBC, the Doctor Who production crew, Tom Baker and several other cast members she was 63, the people and organisations who knew her well. Which makes her birth 1948.

Tom Baker was a very close friend, so here is his source: http://www.tom-baker.co.uk/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=159 At the top of the page. Empoleon9 (talk) 19:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider that a reliable source, but how about this one? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/8464295/Elisabeth-Sladen.html "Elisabeth Sladen was born in Liverpool on February 1 1948..." --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:01, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind -- if the Guardian published 1946 as a correction, they must have been quite sure it was correct. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The 1946 date is perfectly possible, of course though I agree with you the '48 date is given by the vast majority of sources online, Actresses are known to occasionally tweak their DOBs for professional purposes. Alas, the official records are behind a paywall. 86.154.177.24 (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surely the fact people who knew her personally say she was 63 is more reliable. Tom Baker's website would be a reliable source, he wrote that page himself and I doubt he would have got her birth date wrong, as would several other people. Empoleon9 (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Um, reliability doesn't work that way on WP. We don't (well, we try not to) make assumptions like "TB was ES's mate, so he probably should have known."

Reliable editors are stating 1946, and I suspect they are right. It seems probable that official records also support the possibility that ES was telling a small, harmless white lie to lengthen her career. The irony is that she looked great for her claimed 63 years and bloody amazing for someone of 65! In her place, I would have added 5 years to my age and crowed about how great I looked! ":86.154.177.24 (talk) 20:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC which mrs E Sladen work for for over many years claims she was born in 1948 1st Feb and also i think this should be corrcet befor it is reported to her Puplisict and here is a referance (http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/dw/news/bulletin_110419_01/Elisabeth_Sladen) this states she was 63 and as the BBC paid salary to her, the late Mrs E sladen Would be unable to lie on her application form and her tax records so i think this should be corrected.

Um. she was Mrs Miller or, professionally, Miss Sladen. We have no idea exactly how she was paid, or that there ever was an "application form" (more likely a contract), etc. Please remember to sign your comments. 86.154.177.24 (talk) 21:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is look at the BBC her Employer which says she died aged 63 which means she was born in 1948, please correct this and sorry i do not know how to sign cooments, please state how to below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Business badger (talk • contribs) 21:13, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Four tildes (4 x ~) will give you a signature. Place it at the end of your message which will then be automatically signed and dated when you save. Britmax (talk) 21:25, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Births England and Wales 1837-2006 is free for anyone to search. Jim Michael (talk) 21:47, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.yoliverpool.com/forum/showthread.php?51615-Obituary-Elisabeth-Claira-Heath-Sladen-The-Sarah-Jane-Adventures-Dr-Who-Etc http://doctorwhotv.co.uk/elisabeth-sladen-%E2%80%93-the-one-and-only-18444.htm http://www.corrie.net/profiles/actors/sladen_elisabeth.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13156306 http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0805207/ http://www.doctorwhonews.net/2011/04/dwn190411204508-elisabeth-sladen-1948.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/dw/news/bulletin_110419_01/Elisabeth_Sladen http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-13137674 http://tv.uk.msn.com/photos/photos.aspx?cp-documentid=157116370

all these Websites are all academically Reconised and all claim that the Late Mrs E Sladen, was 63 at her death, also other articals by tom baker and David Tennet say she was 63, can the main editor please correct this.

All her co-workers are saying she was 63, please correct this, even though this is not a vaild academic stie people still belive this and i think the BBC can not be wrong. Business badger (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to believe that all her friends and work colleagues (and fan sites) knew her age she would have been consistent through her career as to her date of birth but please see discussions above. MilborneOne (talk) 21:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And there are as many sites that state 1946. Unless you have compelling new evidence... 86.154.177.24 (talk) 21:54, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will add more Websites and the live news report claimed 63, this means she was born in 1948, the only way to settel this will be to look up her Birth Records. However for now I belive it should be set at what the BBC claims it to be. Business badger (talk) 22:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*sigh* Her birth records _were_ looked up. Try reading the reast of the page.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:08, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Business Badger, please stop endlessly repeating yourself, mate. Please also read the discussion further up this page - the points you keep making have already been covered, 86.154.177.24 (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]