Jump to content

Talk:Jill Valentine

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleJill Valentine is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 19, 2020.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 11, 2004Articles for deletionRedirected
October 16, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
March 17, 2013Good article nomineeNot listed
January 21, 2015Good article nomineeListed
May 21, 2017Peer reviewReviewed
June 13, 2017Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
August 15, 2017Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 5, 2017Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 27, 2017Peer reviewReviewed
May 29, 2018Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 27, 2018Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 15, 2019Featured article candidatePromoted
December 8, 2024Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
Current status: Featured article

Popularity

[edit]

According to Capcom's data from a poll they held recently, Jill is the company's 6th most-popular character; number #5 with men and #7 with women. The female character with the most votes internationally and at second place in Japan, after Chun-Li. Should some of this data be included in the article, or are they not noteworthy? PanagiotisZois (talk) 19:17, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was rejected. See at the end of second section or simply scroll up. ๐Ÿ•Boneless Pizza!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 22:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a strong and well-established consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games that adding listicles that rank characters, such as by popularity, is poor-quality journalism and that it's embarrassing to include this information on Wikipedia. Instead we summarise things. So the article currently says Jill is "among the most popular and iconic video game characters" and then provides multiple listicle sources after this. We can also extract information from listicles to explain why the character is popular. I.e. what is currently written in the article: " Magazines praised her as the most likeable Resident Evil character,[listicle source] with the most believable and consistent story arc in the series.[listicle source]". But simply saying she is the 6th most-popular character according to a poll that doesn't explicitly clarify why she is considered popular is the kind of information we're actively trying to avoid as a project. Damien Linnane (talk) 02:47, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Make sense, well I also rewritten most of RE characters at reception as "among the most popular and iconic video game characters" or "Magazines praised her as the most likeable Resident Evil character" then omitted most of the text that are written like listicles for ex. you said "top 6th most-popular character according to a [magazine]" from the article Chris Redfield and especially Ada Wong. ๐Ÿ•Boneless Pizza!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 02:56, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Damien Linnane she is set to appear at Universal Studios this year. Something to add [1] ๐Ÿ•Boneless Pizza!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 07:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy for you to add the information. To be honest I'm not looking for ways to expand any articles myself. I pretty much just monitor changes to my watchlist these days. Damien Linnane (talk) 12:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't add the source that I provided above because I have no idea where or what to add wordings. Just in case if I am not very sure what to do, I usually ping you just in case hehe (Update: I already added it myself). Also, about the italicizing game and film titles per MOS:CONFORMTITLE, maybe I will work on it since it was brought up from Wikipedia:Peer review/Ada Wong/archive1. ๐Ÿ•Boneless Pizza!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 12:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Damien Linnane She is a playable character in DBD, not skin btw. ๐Ÿ•Boneless Pizza!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 14:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying. I'll change it. Damien Linnane (talk) 14:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The book page 46 said Ada and Jill's appearance was intended to appeal to a presumed straight male audience. Something that can possibly be added to the article. ๐Ÿ•Boneless Pizza!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 10:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dead citations?

[edit]

There are so many dead websites that were cited. Citations such as references no.119, 131, 134, 149 and 151. 14.46.188.222 (talk) 03:08, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, they weren't dead at the time when they were cited. All of the websites were archived in advance anyway, so I've just updated them as dead now, so that when you click on the links it automatically takes you to the archived version, which is still available. Problem solved. Damien Linnane (talk) 05:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sienna Guillory's film version was met with mixed responses

[edit]

Where on earth did you pull that from? It was met with universal praise. She was hailed as nailing the character right to a tee and pretty much the only bright thing about Paul WS Anderson awful film franchise! 86.2.22.167 (talk) 09:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't read the quote properly. It doesn't say her performance as Valentine received a mixed response, it says the OUTFIT they made her wear received a mixed response. And the three sources that information was 'pulled from' are right there at the end of the quote, as is customary. Please read things more carefully and actually check the sources provided before making comments on talk pages in the future. Damien Linnane (talk) 11:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Original actress found and identified

[edit]

Now that Inez Paulson has been located, her credit should be updated on this page. Shinyolivia (talk) 06:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In order to update it we'd need a source that satisfies WP:RS. Reddit does not. If you have a reliable source, please link it and we'll update it accordingly. Damien Linnane (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Citations error?

[edit]

Paleface Jack I see no citations error in my POV. What error exactly is that? maybe Damien Linnane can see? Update I think I resolved it now [2]. ๐Ÿ•BP!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 05:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see what the issue was in the old version. Whatever it was it appears fixed now so I support removing the tag. Paleface Jack, I'd recommend at least using the edit summary in the future to explain what is wrong, if you don't start a conversation on the talk page about it. Have a nice day. Damien Linnane (talk) 07:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Damien Linnane Will do. I have a citation bot that shows me broken or error citations. That was what I was seeing. I will double check to see if it is giving me false readings. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the "Capcom 2010 and Capcom 2015 are still giving me a "Harv error: link from CITEREFCapcom2015 doesn't point to any citation.", same message appears for the one in 2010. Web citations for McMullen, Sarkeesian, and Frank are also giving me similar error messages.Paleface Jack (talk) 17:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Damien Linnane @Paleface Jack I think this is similar to my FAC [3] before. I implemented all "|ref=none". I thi nk I fixed it. But, if there is still error from your POV, can you place |ref=none at citation? Thanks! ๐Ÿ•BP!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 23:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed it. Didn't need USA for Capcom refs. Paleface Jack (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I knew |ref=none is needed when it comes to source bundling. ๐Ÿ•BP!๐Ÿ• (๐Ÿ””) 00:48, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]