Talk:Ruth Jones
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Middlesbrough
[edit]That picture isn't in Middlesbrough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.98.3 (talk) 20:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Birth Year
[edit]It currently says 1972 on here, but a month or two ago she did one of the celebrity questionnaires which appear daily in The Independent, which gave her age as 36. Can't find much else online. Crisso 17:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well I seem to remember hearing that she graduated from Warwick Uni towards the end of the 1980s so I would certainly put her nearer 40 than 36. Maybe someone who knows will come along - but she certainly isn't 34. - Stevecov 12:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
- It states on here she was born in 1966, which indeed she was as I know here sister quite well and live in Porthcawl where everyone is extremely proud of her!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.214.227 (talk) 11:31, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Family and personal life
[edit]I removed information about her family. The information was not only unattributed, but also incorrect.
- But have they mentioned in any published article, like a news report? Otherwise we can't really add them. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:47, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Honorary Degree
[edit]![]() | Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented. See below. |
- Please add 'Ruth Jones received an Honorary Degree from the University of Warwick in July 2013' to the Recognition and Awards section. >http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/pressreleases/warwick_honorary_degrees_for_stars_of_gavin__stacey__hustle_rsc__royal_court_artistic_directors_scientists_historians_philanthropist___a_us_government_adviser1/#ruth
- Please add a link to the following audio podcast in the External Links section: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/podcasts/upload/ruth_jones_-_honorary_graduate_13.mp3
-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amyhowes (talk • contribs) 16:27, 31 July 2013
- I've
Done the honorary degree mention, but
Not done the external link, per my reasoning at Talk:Dominic Cooke. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:43, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Residence
[edit]The info box top right states that RJ lives in Ireland, which I find unlikely. Flapdragon (talk) 15:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- Probably vandalism. I'll change it back - thanks for noticing. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Wrong version of Emma in Filmography
[edit]I'm not confident in amending links so don't want to change it myself, but the link to the film 'Emma' in the filmography points to the wrong version. Ruth was in the 1996 adaptation with Gwyneth Paltrow, not the TV version with Kate Beckinsale.92.24.155.96 (talk) 17:32, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- I've fixed it. 78.144.190.46 (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Place of birth in infobox
[edit]Hi there ImprovedWikiImprovment, Template:Infobox person says very clearly: "Place of birth: city, administrative region, country." In 1966 the administrative region was Glamorgan. Why is this a "Redundant dab" exactly? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- Because you can convey virtually the same information without it in a succinct way, which the documentation also suggests. Secondly, cities and towns in the UK can span several counties, as Manchester, London, and Birmingham did historically (for example). Unless there are several places in Wales under that name, it is redundant to mention the county it was in at the time. --IWI (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- Well it looks like more, and useful, information to me. I'm pretty sure Bridgend has never "spanned several counties". There is also a Bridgend, in Ceredigion, currently a red link. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Date of birth
[edit]FreeBMD shows a registration record of Jones' birth in the last quarter of 1966. This BBC source confirms the year. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- BBC source is fine, no problem with that. FreeBMD cannot be used, though, because it fails WP:BLPPRIMARY. I think it would be a good idea to remove the link from your comment above to avoid violation. Best regards 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 20:59, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I was certainly not suggesting that FreeBMD should be used as a source in the article. I present it here nevertheless as an extremely reliable source. I hardly think the provision of a link to a public domain source, that simply shows registration in the last quarter of 1966, represents any kind of "violation" and, as far as I know, there is no policy requirement to remove it. At least we now have the bare bones to inform further search for an exact date. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- WP:BLPPRIMARY is clear: "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth." The reason I suggested removing it is because WP:BLP covers talk pages as well as article pages. Please, I'm not asking you to just take my word for it, read the policies and see for yourself. 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 21:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've never previously been asked to remove a link to FreeBMD. I think it's a bit pointless. But as you seem particularly distressed, I've now removed it. Editors can easily search for themselves. I wonder have you looked for a reliable source for the date? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, I appreciate it. That you've not been asked to before tells me that not enough editors are reading the policies cited above. The 'editors can search for themselves' argument works both ways, in a way - if they can find the information elsewhere, why do we need it on Wikipedia? Don't worry - that was a rhetorical, slightly tongue-in-cheek question. I understand the desire to try and collate all the known information. I only wish it to be added in ways that comply with the BLP policy. And yes, I always do a quick search to see if I can find a citation to add myself before I remove anything. Quick, because, if it meets the 'widely published by reliable sources' criteria, I should be able to find it easily. Sometimes it's not widely published but another editor finds an Instagram post of the subject saying "It's my birthday" and that's that (which meets WP:ABOUTSELF. At the end of the day, we're all trying to make Wikipedia better, and if my removing an unsourced or poorly sourced DOB is what prompts someone to find sourcing that meets the required bar, then we're all good, right? Best regards 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Errmm... I think the aim is that the information on Wikipedia can all be found elsewhere? There's also an argument that it's the GRO records that are the WP:PRIMARY source, and that FreeBMD is a secondary collation with editorial oversight. I'm surprised that the FreeBMD entry hasn't been given a postem yet, confirming that it's Ruth Jones the actress. But then it's transcribed by volunteers, so what can you expect, lol. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- My joke clearly fell flat, and as the Scalzi failure mode of clever probably applies, I can only apologise for the feeble attempt. Regarding FreeBMD, I note that it has been discussed on RSN more than once, as I was going to add a link but I see you were involved in at least one of the discussions! As they are simply original records transcribed and presented in electronic form, I don't find that enough to transform it to a secondary instead of a primary source. (Seems equivalent to the trial transcripts example prohibited by the above policy, if you're focusing on the 'transcribed' part rather than the public record part) 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 23:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Perhaps that's a fair comparison. I've always assumed that the "widely reported" part of the policy is there to protect the privacy of people who don't want their date of birth to be widely known. Is that correct? Or perhaps there's doubt over people with the same name i.e. the possibility of mistaken identity? I'm pretty sure that doesn't apply in this case. These are records, fully in the public domain, that are typically used, in a legal context, as proof of identity. Few other records are treated as being as reliable as these are. It still seems somewhat bizarre to say they are out of bounds. But thanks for the mention of John Scalzi. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- There's this one, but it might be just an unregulated pay-wall portal? What about Rotten Tomatoes? Looking at WP:RSP it says "
Rotten Tomatoes is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and its news articles on film and TV
"? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
- My joke clearly fell flat, and as the Scalzi failure mode of clever probably applies, I can only apologise for the feeble attempt. Regarding FreeBMD, I note that it has been discussed on RSN more than once, as I was going to add a link but I see you were involved in at least one of the discussions! As they are simply original records transcribed and presented in electronic form, I don't find that enough to transform it to a secondary instead of a primary source. (Seems equivalent to the trial transcripts example prohibited by the above policy, if you're focusing on the 'transcribed' part rather than the public record part) 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 23:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Errmm... I think the aim is that the information on Wikipedia can all be found elsewhere? There's also an argument that it's the GRO records that are the WP:PRIMARY source, and that FreeBMD is a secondary collation with editorial oversight. I'm surprised that the FreeBMD entry hasn't been given a postem yet, confirming that it's Ruth Jones the actress. But then it's transcribed by volunteers, so what can you expect, lol. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, I appreciate it. That you've not been asked to before tells me that not enough editors are reading the policies cited above. The 'editors can search for themselves' argument works both ways, in a way - if they can find the information elsewhere, why do we need it on Wikipedia? Don't worry - that was a rhetorical, slightly tongue-in-cheek question. I understand the desire to try and collate all the known information. I only wish it to be added in ways that comply with the BLP policy. And yes, I always do a quick search to see if I can find a citation to add myself before I remove anything. Quick, because, if it meets the 'widely published by reliable sources' criteria, I should be able to find it easily. Sometimes it's not widely published but another editor finds an Instagram post of the subject saying "It's my birthday" and that's that (which meets WP:ABOUTSELF. At the end of the day, we're all trying to make Wikipedia better, and if my removing an unsourced or poorly sourced DOB is what prompts someone to find sourcing that meets the required bar, then we're all good, right? Best regards 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've never previously been asked to remove a link to FreeBMD. I think it's a bit pointless. But as you seem particularly distressed, I've now removed it. Editors can easily search for themselves. I wonder have you looked for a reliable source for the date? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- WP:BLPPRIMARY is clear: "Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth." The reason I suggested removing it is because WP:BLP covers talk pages as well as article pages. Please, I'm not asking you to just take my word for it, read the policies and see for yourself. 2A02:C7C:CC80:8200:B4FF:FC7A:8941:66A3 (talk) 21:39, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
- I was certainly not suggesting that FreeBMD should be used as a source in the article. I present it here nevertheless as an extremely reliable source. I hardly think the provision of a link to a public domain source, that simply shows registration in the last quarter of 1966, represents any kind of "violation" and, as far as I know, there is no policy requirement to remove it. At least we now have the bare bones to inform further search for an exact date. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Birthplace
[edit]All three current sources say she was born in Bridgend. Are there any sources which claim she was born in Porthcawl? The FreeBMD entry (the link to which I was asked to remove in the preceding thread), clearly shows Bridgend. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (actors and filmmakers) articles
- Actors and filmmakers work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class screenwriter articles
- Low-importance screenwriter articles
- WikiProject Screenwriters articles
- C-Class television articles
- Low-importance television articles
- WikiProject Television articles
- C-Class Comedy articles
- Low-importance Comedy articles
- WikiProject Comedy articles
- C-Class Wales articles
- High-importance Wales articles
- WikiProject Wales articles
- C-Class Women writers articles
- Mid-importance Women writers articles
- WikiProject Women articles
- WikiProject Women writers articles
- Partially implemented requested edits