Wikipedia

Talk:Jill Abbott

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Yoryla in topic Deletion would be ridiculous
Learn more about this page
Good articleJill Abbott has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 16, 2013Good article nomineeListed
edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Jill is NOT a Chancellor. Although the former writer Lynn Marie Latham, insisted on using this fallacy from time to time Jill has never been a Chancellor. Chancellor is the last name of her mother, Katherine, through marriage. As Katherine was neither married to Chancellor at the time of Jill's birth or had Jill with Chancellor the name is not hers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.195.31 (talk) 06:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

jill is a chancellor by marriage like katherine. you obviously don't realize she married kat's husband, but kat found a way to dissolve their marriage after the husband's death which kat caused.

Yes, Jill married Phillip on his death bed, but because Katherine and Phillip's divorce (which they were undergoing) hadn't dissolved the marriage, Jill was forced to annull her marriage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.93.216.37 (talk) 22:58, 3 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Don't yap, you bitch. And sign your comments. Yoryla (talk) 21:06, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The image Image:KayJill.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.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Deletion would be ridiculous

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion

There are a multitude of articles on soap operas and soap opera characters. Jill Foster Abbott is a major character (and the only remaining original character) on The Young and the Restless, which has been the highest rated American soap opera each and every week for over 1000 weeks -- in other words, about TWENTY YEARS. That alone makes that article worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia.

True, it needs to be cleaned up, but deletion? That's just insane! -- ABCxyz (talk) 05:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

If you really feel that way then clean the article up and add notability. Right now it's just a plot summary and that's not notable. Like the proposal for deletion says "no attempt has been made to establish real world notability". That's true for most of the soap opera articles. The Young and the Restless ones go against Wikipedia policy more so than most since too many of the editors contributing to them are more concerned with updating plot and moving articles away from common names, than they are in making real improvements.Rocksey (talk) 06:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
True, the article needs improvement. But the only character of Y&R who has been with the show since it's first episode shouldn't have its page deleted. That's just crazy. I would improve it, but I'm way too busy doing other things. Maybe sometime in the future. Dmarex (talk) 08:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • Suggestion: Stop wasting energy on the talk page and improve the article by addressing the problem identified. If we all followed the same rules Wikipedia would be more respected as a reference source and wouldn't invite as much ridicule as it does at the present time. Thanks. Boston (talk) 09:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't instruct others on how to spend their time. If you think it should be done, Boston, do it, don't complain. Yoryla (talk) 21:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Jill Fenmore

edit
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Why isn't this article titled "Jill Fenmore". She is no longer going to be known commonly as "Jill Foster Abbott" or historically as "Jill Foster Abbott", because her birthright isn't "Foster" and she has blattnely made it clear she is no longer an "Abbott". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.93.216.37 (talk) 05:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Please read WP:NCCN. The character changed her name a few days ago. That hardly makes Fenmore her common name. For over 20 years, she has been most notably recognized as Jill Foster Abbott in the series, in the real world press and books. Maybe over time, the character will be more notably known by this new name, but we can't speculate on what might happen. Rocksey (talk) 21:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Requested move

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

{{subst:Jill Foster Abbott|Jill Fenmore or Jill Abbott Fenmore}} It has now been over a year since Jill changed her name to Fenmore. I think it is time that it became official. I cannot do this myself because the target page Jill Fenmore already exits. Allukka (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

  • She has had Jill Foster Abbott as her name since the eighties, throughought 1990s and 2000s and to now. Just because currently her legal name is Fenmore no need to move the page, but her name in the opening text may be changed. Don't move it or it will be moved back. --SoapJar21 Talk? 14:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Jill Foster Abbott/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: BrickHouse337 (talk · contribs) 21:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    Fairly well written, and fairly well copyedited. A few concerns:
  • "In 1984, Dickson returned to the role, and though she stated that she would never leave, she was replaced by Walton in 1987, who continues to portray the role." Need to reword. Perhaps, "In 1984, Dickson returned to the role, and though she stated that she would never leave, she was replaced by Walton in 1987, who continues to portray the character to present time."
  • "According to a birth certificate shown onscreen in 2003, Jill's birth year was revised to 1957". Also need to reword. Perhaps, "In 2003, Jill's birth certificate confirmed the year of her birth as 1957."
  • In characterization, it gives a bit too much history on the character's professions. "In 1973, Jill was an 18-year-old manicurist who had an education, but grew up with limited means. She eventually became a successful executive at Jabot Cosmetics and later was CEO of Chancellor Industries. In 2009, Jill became broke and opened up a secret nail salon miles away from Genoa City, returning her to her original profession as a manicurist...,etc." Need to reword. Perhaps, "Jill is known as a businesswoman, after working as a manicurist during her youth. Walton has said that she wants to see Jill's business side incorporate into the storyline more, stating: "That's what Jill has always done, and she does it well. She was a really successful businesswoman. Jill did a lot of foolish things, but she was a savvy businesswoman." Additionally, Walton described Jill's business as the "core of the whole character", stating: "Jill is really a part of me – this is a unique job in that part of me does live as Jill, and I know Jill is a very savvy businesswoman."
  • Need a comma after "Of her relationship with ex-con Larry Warton (Shark Fralick)."
  • It seems that the character's storylines may not include all of her actual storylines over the years, but I don't see that as a huge ordeal, and it can be fixed over time.
  Done. And I'm aware of the storylines discrepancies, and yes, they can be fixed over time. Creativity97 21:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  • Looks fine; all of the sources are reliable and verifiable; good job.
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    Well covered as far as focus.
  2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  3. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  4. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
    Per Wikipedia policies, only one non-free image is allowed to represent a fictional character. Given this, I suggest the Brenda Dickson image be removed, as Walton is the current portrayer.
  Done. Creativity97 21:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
  1. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Overall, this article generally meets the GA criterion. After my concerns above are addressed, I will return to pass/fail the article. Cheers, --Brick House 337 21:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
Fixed all of the concerns addressed. Let me take this chance to thank you so much, BrickHouse337, for being so fast and prompt with this review. It is greatly appreciated; not only that, you are helping turn around today's soap articles on Wikipedia. Again, thanks! Regards, Creativity97 21:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thankyou so much BrickHouse337 for your speedy review :) It means a lot to c97 and myself. Arre 06:20, 16 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thank you both for your kind words. Apologies for the delay here; I gave the article one last read through and it looks pretty good for now. Pass   --Brick House 337 20:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jill Abbott. 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) 10:54, 22 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jill Abbott. 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) 03:55, 5 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jill Abbott. 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) 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Jill Abbott. 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) 09:23, 25 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jill_Abbott&oldid=1207248960"