Talk:Tina Fey/Archive 1

Archive 1

Religion

Am I correct in thinking that on Weekend Update Tina Fey recently executed the sign of the cross in the manner used in the Greek Orthodox Church, touching her right shoulder first (as opposed to the Roman Catholic manner in which the left shoulder comes first)? Asserting her Greekness? Also, is she in any way a religious person? (I know she got married in a Greek Orthodox church, but often people who are not particularly religious nonetheless get married in a church.) Michael Hardy 23:14, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

She is a scientologist.

I highly doubt she's a scientologist as she rips into Tom Cruise frequently.

That isn't mean she's not a scientologist; cruise isn't their diety 0.o Christians make fun of Jerry Falwell. --Froth 05:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

nothing on the web supports this claim. Joeyramoney 06:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

crap like this makes you wish you could delete discussions. Give any evidence at all before you look stupid 24.210.46.182 18:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Mean Girls

What? No mention of her Screenplay MEAN GIRLS?!?

Feminism

The article makes no mention of feminism, yet is listed in Category:feminists. Any takers on a source? Avriette 03:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

For informations sake, that category was added in this revision. Qutezuce 04:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

just read it last month - in Salon she says "Either I'm a true feminist, or I have the worst show business instincts of anyone I know." Kingturtle 10:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Scar

Where did the scar on her left cheek came from anyway?

She never tells.Poisonouslizzie 03:20, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

That Scar is hot!!!--205.188.116.11 08:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

This woman is HOT!!! Totally sexy. I'd worship her 'noonie'.

I had read somewhere that it was from an accident that happened to her as a child and she doesn't talk about it out of deference to her parents. 68.187.198.235 02:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Who cares? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.166.123.147 (talk) 17:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Her contract.

• Could someone please add information regarding how much longer she is under contract to be on SNL?--Josh 00:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I think Saturday 5/20/06 was her last SNL episode.. they had a tribute during Weekend Upate and at the end she wore a T-shirt that said Thank You. She has a sitcom premiering on NBC in the Fall .. can't do both! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.200.116.136 (talk • contribs)

Table

what's up with that big table at the bottom? WU is just one of her skits, that info doesn't need its own table. not to mention that info is mentioned 5 or 6 times throughout the article. Froth 05:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Leaving SNL to work on 30 Rock

There are clues that Fey has left SNL from the May 20, 2006 show (as mentioned above), but a reliable source is needed. I just checked her NBC bio and Google News, and found nothing. I'll mark the statement as needing a source. 66.167.252.127 20:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC).

UPDATE

She is definitely leaving Saturday Night Live to begin her work on 30 Rock. She just stated that on Jay Leno's The Tonight Show.

Citation Crazy

It appears someone has gone citation crazy on this page. Many of the statements were well in need of a citation, but saying that stating she starred in Martin & Orloff needs a citation goes a little too far. Either she did or she didn't, and it should be commonly known which one is true. Citations are designed to provide support for questionable or obscure facts, not as requirement for every declarative statement made. --Astarf 08:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Last real talent leaving

For a long time SNL has been losing its edge and with the loss of Tina Fey, the decline is sure to continue. Do they not know talent anymore? The only people who pop up there now seem to expect to become stars immediately. Just not happening for most unless someone feels bad for them. Perhaps SNL will end and MadTV will take over the talent reins. Tina you will be missed. --64.12.116.11 14:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Penny

Really? I think shes about as funny as brain cancer. SNL hasn't been funny for years. ʄ!•¿talk? 04:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, brain cancer is pretty fucking funny, if you ask me. -R. fiend (talk) 05:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

formatting

the formatting of this page is allllll goofed up. i tried editing it but gave up; i don't know where things are supposed to go, and some refs get cut in half, and etc. hopefully someone can fix this up --dan 20:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

La chica genio de Saturday Night Live

While updating 30 Rock, I came across this somewhat entertaining description of Fey and her new show:

Tina Fey, la chica genio de Saturday Night Live escribe, produce y protagoniza en un set de comedia detrás de las cámaras de un programa de variedades de televisión donde Alec Baldwin es el jefe más disfuncional que alguien pueda desear. (from Sony Entertainment TV's Synopis of 30 Rock).

"La chica genio de Saturday Night Live"...66.167.253.21 02:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC).

Aqua Teen Hunger Force Colon Movie For Theaters

She did the voice of the 9-layer bean burrito (Frylock's mother) in the movie. It's about 3 lines of dialog. Should that be included on the article page? 76.66.7.22 17:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tinafey-snl-hd-20051001.jpg

Image:Tinafey-snl-hd-20051001.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to look for a cc-by licensed image. best, Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joebeone (talk • contribs) 22:41, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I've found a CC-licensed image of Tina Fey that I'll add in a few days unless someone objects... it's not as good as the one we have now, but it has a known pedigree and the photographer has agreed to relicense under CC-attribution. -- Joebeone (Talk) 17:10, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Writer Strike

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071105/ap_on_bi_ge/hollywood_labor

Anyone know her situation/opinion of the strike? She's with the picketers, but she's still on 30 Rock? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.220.2.188 (talk) 19:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

She was contractually obligated to perform her duties as producer on 30 rock during the strike, but was picketing as a member of the WGA. — AMK1211^talk! 14:56, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

cleaning up cites

Hi, I'm going to spend some time going through the cites for this article... I won't do anything substantive, just recast existing cites where needed into citation templates. Joebeone (Talk) 17:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Citations are now groomed into cite templates. Joebeone (Talk) 22:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Filmography

Should we add a filmography to make her film + tv appearances more clear? (Wikirocks2 00:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC))

NPOV

I believe that the quote "...on AfterEllen.com, the top website for queer (LGBT) women." includes NPOV in judging AfterEllen.com as the "top" website for queer women. I will change it to read "...on AfterEllen.com, a website for queer (LGBT) women." If anybody would like to add a reference of this site as the most widely-visited queer women's site or something similar (if it is so), I have to objection to saying so. ~TheXRayStyle (talk) 12:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Tina Fey to Host First SNL back from Writer's Strike

If everyone thinks this is notable, TV Guide reports that SNL is returning Feb 23, with Tina Fey hosting. Here's the reference: SNL to Return Feb 23, With Tina Fey Hosting.

Tubesurfer (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

External link to ZotFish?

Hi, I was wondering if it would be appropriate for someone to add an external link to the ZotFish page for Tina Fey?. I believe it's of genuine interest to readers, but I want to make sure I follow Wikipedia policy and not post it myself -- more info on the site can be found at Mashable.

Zotman (talk) 03:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The site violates WP:ELNO, and should not be added to the article. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Tina Fey Returns to SNL

Someone apparently updated article by overwriting part of the section on 30 Rock. I have no idea if this is true but would recommend someone fix this. I would fix it myself but every time I edit Wiki I get nailed to the floor by some pompus Wiki editor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.135.148.118 (talk) 21:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Media box

While archiving, I saw that someone had brought this up a couple years ago, with no response noted. The use of this media box to show her years doing Weekend Update is inappropriate. Weekend Update is a weekly recurring comedy sketch based on news, it is not a legitimate media news broadcast. The media box is expressly for people holding posts in the media. While a succession box would be fine for this, the Template:S-media is not. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism on page

Just checked out the Tina Fey article and it's filled with sexual references and innuendos. I'm new and don't know how to report vandalism, can someone help?

Katclabo (talk) 19:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

SNL Palin pictures

note: this is cross-posted at Talk:Saturday Night Live parodies of Sarah Palin#Non-free images

Any reason there are two different screenshots uploaded (File:SNL Palin Clinton.png and File:Fey Poehler as Palin Clinton.png) and used in different articles? Since these are not free, wouldn't it be better to only have one? That would make it easier to keep track of where it's used. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:07, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Photo

The photo with the caption "Fey filming an episode of 30 Rock at Rockefeller Center in October 2007" looks like a montage when examined in full size, but the source doesn't have this problem. Can someone check it out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.139.159.111 (talk) 21:39, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

It appears that the source can be found here. Looks like the photographer took the picture from a distance, and against the white ice rink, the subject was dark. Seems that the image was altered for increased brightness, though that alone doesn't seem like grounds to call it a fake photo. Someone had taken the picture off Tina's page, but I restored it. I think it's still worthy of inclusion, even if the brightness was increased.--MikeUMA (talk) 04:12, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

So they tweaked the contrast. I don't see why that should matter. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I removed the image without checking the talk page first, but now that I have been corrected I will address my issue: the problem isnt that its a "fake photo" or that someone tweaked the contrast per se, its that they did it so amateurishly that the photo looks sloppy and fake. This image is not of the quality that wikipedia should be aiming to use. If it were the only free image, or the only free image of tina fey only, etc, then I would be ok with using it. As there are several other much better images already included in the article, this image should be removed, and in my opinion, deleted altogether. as far as "consensus" goes, I would direct your attention to the discussion page of the WP image [1] where the unanimous opinion of five users (apparently ignorant of the appropriate channels necessary to delete a photo) was to delete the image. It doesn't add anything valuable, as there are already multiple images of Fey in the article (please correct me if there is something specific that it adds); it in fact detracts from the article due to the poor quality of the image doctoring. -- InspectorTiger (talk) 22:14, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

It's in the eye of the beholder. I like it better than several of the photos that are in the article. And if you think attractiveness of a photo is a criterion for inclusion or exclusion, you must not have seen the photo they used to use in the Carmen Electra page:File:Tara Leigh Patrick cropped.jpg ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:30, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, quality of photo editing is not. There are big white chunks around her hair where she was obviously cut out, her legs have both big dark strips and white chunks around them, and the mittens are outrageously bright. At no point in my comment did I mention the "attractiveness" of the photo, I actually agree it is a nice shot and would add something to the article if it were properly brightened. But as is it is not of encyclopedic quality due to the photo editing. --InspectorTiger (talk) 01:52, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

This being a free-content site, quality is not a high priority. The editing brings out her facial features better, and your eyes are apparently much sharper than mine to find those other details. I downloaded the original, which obviously took its auto-brightness from the snow and made her too dark; and in the Windows picture handler, 1 click to "auto correct" improved the photo without doing any artificial cut-and-paste. Would you approve of a photo like that which was simply brightened but not otherwise altered? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Here is a cropped version of the autocorrected photo. Not as bright as the photoshopped version, but better than the original, yes? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey. It seems you really want to leave the image in, so I'm going to drop my objection to it for now and suggest that you submit it at the WP:Graphic Lab which is the project that is designed to be the place where experts in this kind of photo modification volunteer their services. I'm not sure how responsive they are over there or exactly how the project works but I have seen some of the work they have done in other articles I've worked on and it's pretty solid. I want to apologize if my earlier comments were overly critical, but this image has been commented on by multiple users (at least two here and several more on talk page of the image [2]) and really ought to be fixed.

A side note, the "autocorrect" button means that the computer cuts out the section of the image, brightens it, and then puts it back. it's the same process as cutting it out yourself, making a new layer, etc. just automated. That's also probably why the cut-out job was so sloppy. If you seriously don't see what i'm talking about blow the image up to full size; you really can't miss it. -- InspectorTiger (talk) 15:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Please undo revert on this IP address: Source is television show and date & this is a public comp with limits

I'm identifying myself as Julzes. At present I do not have ready access to a computer that permits me to remain logged in. The revert in question is a direct quote from a television show that may be located by the date given, and therefore is sourced directly in that fashion. The proper procedure should be to place a citation-needed marker, which would allow a grunt here with greater computer facility to locate the item for linked viewing. Thank you.173.15.152.77 (talk) 02:42, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

As you might infer from edits, I thought my undo didn't take because I undid some other revert. In any case, please allow myself or someone else an opportunity to get this if it is 'YouTube-able' or something (place a citation-needed marker if one really is for a date-given television show).173.15.152.77 (talk) 02:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

It's unsourced trivia and there's no rush to get it into article without proper sources and context. Lots of people say things about Fey. Why is this notable? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:44, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know how you define 'unsourced' and the subject of the show 'Hardball' is debate on American politics on a 5-hours-per-week basis (so not trivial). However, tomorrow I will improve the item to a greater length if possible. The impersonation included 'the media twisting my words by quoting me verbatim', for example.Julzes (talk) 21:03, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Birth Year

This article currently lists the subject's birth year as 1971 in the article header and 1970 in the caption under her picture. Does anyone have a reliable source as to which is correct?BoojumSnark27 (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I have added IMDb as a source. I realize it is not the best source, but until another is found, it can do. --BweeB (talk) 08:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Fey's Picture

Fey's picture at the top should be swapped with the later one, on account of the fact that the top one is actually a picture of a horse, and someone is vandalizing the page by posting horse pictures.(Raskeh (talk) 08:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC))

I'm not sure what do you mean by "horse's picture". Both pictures are perfectly fine and the one in the infobox at present is the latest one. ^LeaveSleaves _talk 04:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I kind of agree with Raskeh, minus the horse part. Not that it's a necessitiy, but the picture could probably be swapped for something else that doesn't look as bad. Jpmcruiser (talk) 13:17, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Keep in mind that Raskeh was referring to this image, not the current one. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:19, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

That picture is extremely photogenic/flattering by any standard. You'd be hard pressed to find a better picture of anyone. It's probably a headshot. It shows the scar on her face very well also. I only looked her up on Wikipedia today since she's been appearing on Comedy Central commercials about the syndication of 30 Rock on that channel. I was surprised to notice such a visible scar on the face of a leading actress. I wonder if movies try to obscure the scar with makeup or decide not to. It's probably a noteworthy precedent/achievement/whatever for women in such a superficial industry. Possibly worth more than a blurb if there is any discussion about it in "acceptable" sources.--12.213.80.55 (talk) 06:32, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

"Don't make my Palin impression last 4 years"

Okay, so this edit of mine is being contested and I'd like explain my reason to want to keep it.

Original text: Fey implored people to make sure that her role as Palin would not be more long-term, saying "I want to be done playing this lady November 5. So if anyone could help me be done playing this lady November 5, that would be good for me."

My revision: Fey implored people to not vote Republican, saying "I want to [...] good for me"

The reason for my change, Fey doesn't care how long she does the Palin impression as a matter of personal interest, and in fact probably would like to keep doing it since it's enormously popular and she gets nothing but praise for her talent. Therefore, the quote "I want to be done playing this lady in November" is not a statement about her request for playing characters so much as a request for political action. This is very explicitly wrapped up in her "so if anyone could help" sentence afterward.

No one reading this would guess what how she conveyed "Don't vote Republican" when the direct and complete quote is right there. I'd like to change this back, maybe with the slight revision of:

Fey implored people to not vote Republican, by saying "I want to [...] good for me"

Thanks. Cheers.--Loodog (talk) 04:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, you are drawing too many implied meanings from her statement. Trying to interpret what Fey meant from her statement would be somewhat of an original research. And since there's is no clear declaration about on her political stand, it'd be out of place to explicitly state it here. LeaveSleaves (talk) 04:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ. It's obvious what she means. She "is obviously not a Palin fan". Statement was "what she really thinks of the vice presidential candidate.". With "November 4" "Fey is making a reference to the election" "Fey was to the point in her opinion about the NRA member who is a staunch pro-lifer.", followed by the "I want to be done playing this lady" quote.

"So if anyone could help me be done playing this lady November 5..." She is explicitly asking for people to assist ("help me") in a particular election ("November 5") result. The number of ways I can think of for this to happen is limited: (1) Palin is killed specifically on election day (which I don't think Fey would ask for), (2) Palin is withdrawn as VP pick on election day (which very few people are in a position to "help" make happen), (3) McCain is not elected president on election day. One of these results is the blindingly obvious one being requested by Fey.--Loodog (talk) 04:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

You have to stop interpreting the meanings and write the statement as it is. It isn't our place to analyze her statements. As for the references you mentioned above, none of them have a different remark than the one given in the present reference. And explicit means explicit, exact words of you claim, not an interpretation. LeaveSleaves (talk) 05:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

The sources I mention are sane people who have also, in your words, commited original research, yet gotten published in established media.

1. Explicitly, she says"help me be done playing this lady November 5". To any reasonable person, what else could she be possibly asking for?

And just to explain that I'm not taking liberties, I'm not claiming she's requesting a vote for a Democrat over Nader. I'm only claiming what any reasonable person thinks she means.

2. I mean, we could get really deconstructivist on this and say that anything time one person thinks he knows what another person means when something is said is commiting interpretation, yet we can claim in our article that the Obama speech A More Perfect Union is about racial tensions, white privilege, and race and inequality. He never explicitly says, "My speech is about racial tensions" so really us writing that is interpreting his words. My point: as far as we can ever say what anyone means about anything when talking, we know Fey is requesting votes not be placed for the Republican party. See point 1. Within reasonable doubt, what else could she mean?

--Loodog (talk) 05:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

First, this isn't a place to discuss other articles, your issues about that article may be discussed on relevant talk page. And please note that the statement on that article you mentioned is well referenced, unlike your statement here, which is an interpretation of your own. This isn't a place for publication of personal thoughts or reasoning but an encyclopedia, and hence different from the sources you mentioned. The argument is not about reasonable doubts but a perfect source for the statement. LeaveSleaves (talk) 05:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Loodog:

I am apolitical, and have no relevant opinion in the politics here. I'm only interested in article quality.

I think that you are putting words in her mouth. I agree that it is almost certainly likely that your interpretation is what she meant, but absent a source, we need to go with what is written.

If there were a source clarifying her position on this statement, then so be it. Source and include (though I would more support eaving it as it is, and adding a sourced interpretation as a follow up statement). If she has statements clarifying her political beliefs, then that too should be sourced and included.

However, for whatever reason (to be less confrontational, to be subtle, to be funny ????) she couched her words this way, and I think it is close (or directly) violating WP:OR to interpret this. I mean, for all I know, she really doesn't like playing the character, doesn't like going back to SNL, etc, and wants a good excuse to not do the character again (admitadly, I think your interpretation is correct, but my opinion shouldn't have any weight in an interpretation being included in an article). LonelyBeacon (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm also apolitical with regard to this issue. I think whether Fey says, "I want to her out of office so I'm not playing her" or not doesn't change anyone's opinion of Palin.

What about a slightly weaker assertion, like, "Fey indirectly implored people to not elect Palin to the vice presidency by saying 'I want to be done playing this lady November 5. [...] good for me'"?--Loodog (talk) 13:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Could you provide a direct valid source that says that statement as it is (no derivatives)? Else, no. LeaveSleaves (talk) 13:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let me try this from the other end, then:

"Though Fey did not explicitly implore people against voting for the candidate's ticket, she talk about her desire to not keep the role, saying, "I want to be done playing this lady November 5. [...] good for me."

Again, I'm not trying to politicize this. The reason I take issue is to just summarize her statement so literally seems excessively concrete, and even obtuse, like we actually took her comment at face value.--Loodog (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

We actually should take her comment to the face value. I hope you understand what LonelyBacon said earlier. Although we may analyze her statement personally (and it's only natural to do so), we shouldn't let that interfere with writing an unbiased, properly sourced statement. If in future there is a further elaboration on her stand, it's fine to write so. But based on the statement available, it won't be correct to deduce her political viewpoint. LeaveSleaves (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I understand that, which I why tried to go at the rephrase by mentioning what she does not say. My latest phrase includes the statements, "she talked about her desire to not keep the role", which is not interpretation so much as summary, and "did not explicitly implore people against voting for the candidate's ticket" which also is a statement of fact and has no interpretation in it. No interpretation = no OR, yes?--Loodog (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Why mention that she didn't implore it? It still sends a connotation, something that may not be intended. Did someone expect her to say it? Has she made any statements earlier that indicate her opposition to Palin or McCain as respective candidates? I fail to understand why do you find the need to derive her political stand from this statement. LeaveSleaves (talk) 16:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

My reasons are mentioned above. It just sounds like someone's telling a joke and we're too obtuse to get it. Like someone tells a rabbi, priest and a minister joke and we reply, "Wait, which rabbi was this?"--Loodog (talk) 20:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, here's what I've done: (1) I've removed the bit about "imploring" since that's interpretation, and (2) I've removed the sentence in the article saying "sure that her role as Palin would not be more long-term" because all we're doing is concretely and redundantly copying her statement and writing it as if we're missing the subtle nod, and (3) wikilinked "November 5" to "United States presidential election, 2008" so that people who aren't Americans can know why that date was mentioned out of all possible dates.

I'm happy with this. :) The quote is the only thing saying anything, which leaves the reader free to interpret the obvious meaning without constraints from us on what it can be taken as.--Loodog (talk) 04:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Solved then. Good job! LeaveSleaves (talk) 04:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

A longstanding challenge occasioned by satirists is for the audience to realize that the satirist is not to be taken at face value (to comprehend, e.g., that Aldous Huxley did not want society to become the way it is in Brave New World). But once that correct perception starts—that the satirist is not expressing prima facie what the satirist feels—a shift by the satirist back to face value is difficult, impossible, unlikely, or out of character. The best procedure with Tina Fey, as it would be with Johnathan Swift, is to let her quotation stand as it was without editorial filter. Rammer (talk) 21:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

The article says that she appeared with McCain on Nov 1st... that wasn't really him, right? It really looked like him... and it wasn't Darryl Hammond. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 03:39, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

That was him. -R. fiend (talk) 03:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

This appears to have been removed alltogether (unless I just mist it somehow?). Was the "end this by November 4" statement referenced. Could someone who knows about it put it back. Even in England we've herd of Palin & the election. Dannman (talk) 15:20, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

"Current Husband"

The article refers to her husband as her "current husband". From what I can see she has only bee married the once and she is still married. Doesn't "current husband" imply that she has been married more than once or, at the very least, her mariage lacks permanence in some respect?

Any objects if I change it?

Bensonby (talk) 22:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. --MikeUMA (talk) 20:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Changed. Bensonby (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Scar location

Don't you think we should move how she got her scar to early life? I mean, she got her scar when she was young, so the scar should be mentioned in her early life. Ginnina (talk) 22:13, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Ginnina (talk)

I agree with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.75.26.84 (talk) 16:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't put it there, but I figured it was because it was more of a personal story than an early childhood one. Estheroliver (talk) 07:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Tina Fey GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tina Fey/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer preliminary comments

Based on one read-through, the article seems in very good shape. I will post more detailed comments here over the next week or two. Initial assessment of the GA criteria:

• Well-written: Generally OK; there are a number of awkward constructions, which I will note in the detailed comments, or fix myself. The ordering and selection of topics under section 2, Career, seem awkward too: 2.1–2.3 are fine, but it's not clear that the Sarah Palin impersonations are significant enough to be a whole stage in her career, and logically "Other work", being a miscellany, would come last.
• Factually accurate and verifiable: looks OK, except that under Detailed works, the tables As a writer and As an actress are unsourced
• Broad in its coverage: generally OK; the Sarah Palin coverage may be too detailed, considering that there is already a separate article on that; according to the article, Fey has received a number of awards or been mentioned on Top Ten lists for being influential, doing good, or changing the world, but the article doesn't mention any specific examples of influence or good deeds, so this may be a missing ingredient
• Neutral: seems OK, except possibly the coverage of reviews of her work, which seem not to mention any negative reviews (I assume there are some)
• Stable: OK; some vandalism, no edit wars
• Illustrated: OK, reasonable number of photos, all have correct licenses, have captions, and are in the correct sections

--Uncia (talk) 21:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Reviewer detailed comments and editor responses

Lede

Coverage is good. The one thing that's missing is a sense of why she is interesting. We need a really good one or two sentence sound bite that can go in the first paragraph and draw people into the article. Any ideas? I found one I like buried deep in the video clips of the 2009 TIME 100 stuff. Belinda Luscombe said, "Tina Fey is on this list because she is very smart and she is very funny, both those things equally," and "[She] has opened the door for dozens and dozens of other funny women to step forward." It's at The People Behind The People but it's buried inside a Flash file and there's no way to link to it directly; you have to navigate to Tina Fey.

Here's a more accessible reference: the same words are in a longer clip, but you don't have to navigate to it. --Uncia (talk) 19:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about adding that video clip to the lead. Doesn't seem encyclopedic to add to the lead. Maybe adding this to the Media section. What do you think? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:24, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not common to have quotations in the lede, but there are good precedents. Look at the ledes of these Featured Articles: James Thomas Aubrey, Jr. (1st paragraph), Rudolph Cartier (last paragraph), and William Gibson (last paragraph). In all cases a brief quote summarizes the importance of the person. We need something to summarize the importance of Tina Fey. --Uncia (talk) 03:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, these article examples you mentioned have something in common, the people have passed away. Fey is very much alive. I'm not saying this is wrong, it's just that it's not suitable to add in the lead. Like I said, this would perfectly fit in the media section. Angelina Jolie's article is FA and doesn't have a quote on her lead, but does have quotes in her media section. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

William Gibson is still alive. --Uncia (talk) 17:50, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Good one. But, the problem is that the quote in the lead does need to be mentioned somewhere in the article. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Other points:

• The lede and the infobox both say she is a producer. Is this true? It's not mentioned anywhere else in the article.
  • As of now, she's the producer of 30 Rock, since she's the creator of the show.
    • OK, please add a note about this when you expand the 30 Rock section, so we'll have a mention and a source. IMDB says she is the executive producer and Jerry Kupfer is the producer. --Uncia (talk) 03:47, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Would ---> "As of September 2009, Fey is executive producer of 30 Rock", work? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
• "She has received ..." numerous awards, but this counts ones that she got individually and that went to shows she worked on, so she didn't actually receive them all, right?
• "In the series, Fey portrays Liz Lemon, the head writer of TGS with Tracy Jordan, a fictional sketch comedy series." I would omit this, as it is more detail than we need and in fact is more detail than is in the article.
  • How 'bout ---> "In the series, Fey portrays Liz Lemon, the head writer of a fictional sketch comedy series"? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:24, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
    • How 'bout ---> "In the series, Fey portrays the head writer of a fictional sketch comedy series"? We won't mention the name Liz Lemon again for another two pages, so it's just clutter to mention it here. --Uncia (talk) 03:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
• I would omit Dratch & Fey, as it doesn't flow well here and only gets one paragraph in the article.
  • Removed.
• "feature film debut" - wrong, same comment as I made under Feature films.
  • Removed.

--Uncia (talk) 22:35, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Early life

There are a lot of problems with the references - in many cases the footnoted work does not contain the fact it is supposed to support, but mysteriously another nearby source does contain the fact. So nearly every fact here has a source here, but often not the source it says. It's like all the sources got scrambled at some point. This needs to be fixed. The items I noticed that need (correct) sources are:

• Father's Scottish ancestry
• Brother name and birth year
• Bachelor of Arts in drama
• Zenovia

The inset quote is a single quote with two sources, which doesn't make any sense: if it's a continuous quote it should all be from one source, and if it's not a continuous quote it should not be formatted like this. One of the sources is offline and I can't check it, and the online source discusses this subject but doesn't have any of this quote.

I found an online source for the whole quote here. This is probably the same as the offline second source, as it is the same author and close date. --Uncia (talk) 15:02, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Fey's mother's name is variously spelled Zenovia or Zenobia in this article - which is correct? Neither is sourced here.

Footnote 2 is formatted as a reference, but is really a footnote. The material appears to be trivia and is unsourced and so perhaps would be better omitted. If you really want to include it as a footnote, it needs to be separated from the references in a Notes section; see WP:REFNOTE. --Uncia (talk) 03:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe I got all of the items on the top. Also, I replaced the footnote with a {{cite episode}} ref. If I missed something, please let me know. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:45, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

The two sources say that her brother is eight years older, but that's not enough to pinpoint his birth year. Suggest rewriting this just to say he's eight years older. --Uncia (talk) 14:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Career

Early career

Overall good. I made some clarifications, but there were some phrases I couldn't figure out and that need to be fixed.

• "By 1994, she was invited to join the cast of The Second City, where she performed eight shows a week." Several points:

• "By 1994" is awkward - was she invited "in 1994", or at some unknown date which was in or before 1994?
  • I reworded the sentence.
• Similarly, when was she performing 8 times a week?
  • For over two years.
• Who invited her?
• This item needs a source or sources

• "where she performed alongside Scott Adsit, Kevin Dorff, Rachel Dratch, Jenna Jolovitz, and Jim Zulevic" - does this refer to both revues, or were some in one revue and some in the other? Neither of the two sources gives this list of players.

• • Yeah, the cast is for both revues. Also, I've added sources.

• Reference 19, the Marie Claire piece "Tina Fey on Top", is not a great reference because it is mostly made up and it's not clear to the naive reader which parts (if any) are factual. Since you have another reference for this fact, I suggest omitting the Marie Claire reference.

• • I removed it.

• "she met friend and future co-star Amy Poehler" is awkward because it mixes times. Presumably they weren't friends when they first met. "Co-star" refers to particular shows; it's not a permanent condition. Probably this phrase should be rewritten something like "she befriended Amy Poehler, who would become her co-star in ...."

--Uncia (talk) 15:13, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

• • I just removed the Amy Poehler thing, not really important to include, unless you think its notable to have. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Saturday Night Live

This section had a lot clumsy and repetitious writing. I rewrote some of it, and it is not bad now.

This section had a lot of details that, although possibly correct, were not in the sources, and I have taken out some of these and marked the others as needing citations. My impression, based on looking at a tiny bit of the page history, is that the references were replaced at one point because they were no longer on the web, but unfortunately the new references don't support the claims here.

• When was Fey a co-writer of Weekend Update? Did it start before she became co-anchor? There's no source for this info, and it needs to be put in the proper chronological order.
  • I couldn't find anything, so I removed it.
• This is misquoted: "Michaels, in regards to this, noted that Fey and Poehler 'have been the strongest thing on the show....'" The source says "These women have been the strongest thing...", and from the context "these women" refers to all the women working on SNL, not just Fey and Poehler. This needs to be fixed, although with this correction it's no longer a very interesting quote for this article, and perhaps should be deleted.
  • That was my bad. I read the quote wrong. Anyways, I removed it.
• "The reception to the teaming of Fey and Poehler was positive." The reference doesn't say this; the most it says is that the author considers it "SNL's most notable step forward".
  • I added a review.
• Many of the details in the 6th paragraph, beginning "In September 2005, Fey went on maternity leave", are not in the source. It might make more sense to move the verifiable parts of this to Personal life, because it doesn't seem to have had much effect on her career. Things that are not sourced include the September 2005 date, that she went on leave after giving birth (usually maternity leave starts shortly before giving birth), that Sanz covered for two episodes.
  • Do you want me to remove it?
    • Yes, let's just take that paragraph out. I like the quote about the verbal agreement with the baby, but I don't see a good way to work it into the narrative. --Uncia (talk) 03:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Yeah, the quote is genius. Maybe adding it to the PL section? But, in a reworded way. What do you think? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
        • How about this wording under Personal life?

They have a daughter, Alice Zenobia Richmond, who was born on September 10, 2005, during Fey's tenure at SNL. Fey returned to the show on October 22, saying "I had to get back to work. NBC has me under contract; the baby and I have only a verbal agreement."

You can omit that the baby was born in New York City, and that they lived there (not that important, and unsourced anyway). Then take out the whole paragraph about the baby in the SNL section. --Uncia (talk) 04:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

--Uncia (talk) 02:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:09, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

30 Rock

Overall good. I reordered and reorganized the text a little bit to make it flow smoother. Some areas that still need attention:

• There's almost no description of the show itself; there's more information about the plot than about the series! What's the show about? (This has shifted since the pilot.) Why is it called 30 Rock? Who are the stars? Who are the producers and directors? Is Fey the head writer as well as the star?
  • I "worked" on the section, modeled after Aaron Sorkin. I thought it would "work" just like his article. Guess not.
• "She acknowledged similarities between Liz and her own life when she became head writer on SNL, primarily a heavy focus on her job." This is garbled. In the cited clip Fey says that "the character Liz is basically like me, but she has a different life than me" and "she's more focused on work probably than I am now", which are the opposite of what the article says. I suggest just deleting this sentence.
  • Removed.
• "The show's ratings improved when NBC moved it to the Thursday night "Must See TV" comedy block." - a couple of problems with this:

• The source doesn't say that ratings improved, and in fact could not say that because it was written just before the move occurred.
• at the time of the move this block was no longer called Must See TV; the source makes it clear that this was a former name. The block is now called "Comedy Night Done Right", but the source doesn't say that. I suggest omitting "Must See TV" and just say "the Thursday night comedy block".
  • Done [on the second one]. So, what do you want me to do with the first one?

• Upon closer examination, the ratings did not improve after the move, so I say let's take this whole sentence out. According to reference 48 (Variety), the pilot ratings were 2.9 rating / 8 share / 8.13 million viewers, and according to the NBC press release announcing the renewal for 2007-2008, the ratings for the first season were 2.7 rating / 7 share / 5.8 million viewers. The show didn't take off until the second season. --Uncia (talk) 03:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

• Has been removed. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

• It's unlikely that production resumed immediately upon the end of the writer's strike, as the article currently says. I have marked this as "verification needed".
  • I removed it.

--Uncia (talk) 16:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Sarah Palin

This section is too long for the rest of the article. It covers about 6 weeks, but is longer that the section covering Fey's very successful 9 years with SNL and is longer that the section covering Fey's very successful 3 years with 30 Rock. I suggest that it be cut down to one or two paragraphs and moved under Other work. I would keep some description of the initial sketch (keep the web promo image too), a brief summary of the other appearances, and the Emmy nomination (which she might still win). If the sketches had any lasting impact and was not just a fad you can mention that too (I haven't seen any evidence for this). Include the separate Wikipedia article; you can work it into the narrative, for example you could lead with "In September and October 2008 Fey performed a series of parodies of Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, on Saturday Night Live." --Uncia (talk) 03:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you can give me some suggestions for the summary, due to the fact that I'm not "good" in that area, I'll take it. Also, I've removed a couple of info., please let me know how you feel about it. I have a question, would adding Palin's appearance ratings be helpful to the section. [3] --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm thinking of a paragraph like this. It's scrunched down from the current section mostly by omitting the press reactions (trumped by the Emmy award) and the public-figure reactions (too dated now, I think). I added the ratings improvement, a little bit of text tweaking to make it flow better, and a lede sentence summarizing the whole thing. (If you want to become a better summarizer, study news stories in newspapers—news writers are master summarizers. See News style.) --Uncia (talk) 13:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

In September and October 2008 Fey guested on Saturday Night Live to perform a series of parodies of Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. On the 34th season premiere episode, aired September 13, 2008, Fey imitated Palin in a sketch, alongside Amy Poehler as Hillary Clinton. Their repartee included Clinton needling Palin about her "Tina Fey glasses". The sketch quickly became NBC.com's most-watched viral video ever, with 5.7 million views by the following Wednesday. Fey reprised this role on the October 4 show, and on the October 18 show where she was joined by the real Sarah Palin. The October 18 show had the best ratings of any SNL show since 1994. Fey won an Emmy in the category of Outstanding Guest Actress in a Comedy Series for her impersonation of Palin.

Alright, I've added this. Thank you and I'll be sure to study news stories so I can be a better summarizer. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I predict that it will one day be much more interesting to look back and see how Tina Fey, a professional expert at speaking other people's words, will become, by passing into politics herself (At the peril of her fans who will dazzle her with their adulation, and only later realize the harm they do) a sort of inverted clone of Sarah Palin, who, for whatever else she is, speaks her own mind (at her own peril, and dazzled by her own morbid light). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.207.4 (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Other work

Good. Because this is a miscellaneous section, I recommend moving it to the end of the Career section. --Uncia (talk) 02:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Feature films

Writing is good on this one, but there are lots of problems with the sources.

• There are a number of places where (it appears) the status of in-progress films was updated, but the references were not updated, so there's no reference for the claimed current status. These include:

• role in Ponyo is Lisa
  • Added source.
• Ponyo was released in August 2009
  • The source does say it, but removed.
• The Invention of Lying: source says she will work on it, not that it is finished
  • Different source.
• Date Night: start date and this plot summary are not in source
  • Added different source.
• Oobermind: source says they are in talks, not that she has agreed

Different source.

• Martin & Orloff: source does not say it premiered at SXSW
  • Added source.
    • Better, but still doesn't say it premiered there. IMDB claims it premiered at the 2002 US Comedy Arts Festival in Aspen. --Uncia (talk) 18:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Removed. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
• "She made her feature film debut as writer and co-star of the 2004 teen comedy Mean Girls." What does "feature film debut" mean here? She was already in the feature film Martin & Orloff.
  • Removed.
• Is there any current info on the forthcoming Sacha Baron Cohen film? What's here is 3-1/2 years old, and all I found online was listings in movie databases that say it's still forthcoming. Per WP:CRYSTAL I suggest that we take this film out unless there is is recent reliable info on it.
  • 2007 and 2007 sources. So technically it's two years.
• Baby Mama: "white-trash schemer": although probably accurate, this description is not in the source.
  • Do you have a suggestion? You know, I'm not suppose to copy everything in the sources, just summarize it. WP:COPYVIO.

--Uncia (talk) 23:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

In the media

Overall good. The title, "In the media", is much too broad—nearly the whole article is about Fey's position "in the media". How about calling it "Other recognition"?

No, I don't want to change the title. See Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Reese Witherspoon, etc., as examples.

• "Viewed as a sex symbol" - by whom?
  • Well, it's there, but I removed it.
• People's Most Beautiful: article says she was named in 2006, 2008, and 2009, but the references are for the 2007, 2008, and 2009 lists. Also the article says "In 2007, she was included in People's 100 Most Beautiful issue." - isn't this the same thing as being on the list?
  • Fixed. The Beautiful issue is not the same as the Beautiful people. They're different issues.
• Rolling Stone: is this really an "annual" list? It doesn't say this in the article; it seems to be a one-shot list.
  • Removed "annual". When I was working on the article, I checked the Rolling Stone article and it said that the "100 People Who Are Changing America" was annual. Looking now, it's not even mentioned.

--Uncia (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Personal life

Good, a few glitches in the references.

• "Jeff Richmond, a former composer on Saturday Night Live." He's also a current composer on 30 Rock; wouldn't this be a better description?
  • I was thinking of adding that.
• Ref 110, "Tina Fey Pregnant", is a dead link. This seems to be an unnecessary link since all the info is in ref 109, so maybe just delete it.
  • Removed.
• "In addition, Fey favors the right side of her face when acting": source says Liz Lemon, not Fey
  • Couldn't we just say that as Liz Lemon she favors her right side?
    • OK. Also take out "In addition" which doesn't make any sense here. --Uncia (talk) 19:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Done. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
• "support of Autism Speaks": not in source; ref 115 (Singh et al) is a scientific paper and probably shouldn't be cited here
  • Replaced.
• Global Envision: source seems to say she is supporting Mercy Corps, not Global Envision; which is correct?
  • Fixed.

--Uncia (talk) 13:55, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I added some stuff (with references of course) about Tina fey selling her Upper West Side Condo for $2.2 million. I'm pretty new to the whole Wikipedia writing and editing process but I thought this was good knowledge and the reference is unbiased and neutral.

In June 2010, it was announced that Fey and her family would be selling their Upper West Side Condominium in Manhattan, New York for $2,295,000 and moving to a 1,873 square feet, five bedroom condominium in the same neighbourhood that was purchased for $3.4 million.[130]

Is this good example of the wikipedia-esque style of writing or not. Feel free to edit and commment. Thanks.

(talk) --30Rockfan

(30Rockfan (talk) 22:53, 2 July 2010 (UTC))

Detailed works

I'm unenthusiastic about tables in general, because I think few people read them, they are vandal magnets, they are hard to keep up to date, they usually repeat information that is already in prose, and in general are more trouble than they are worth. (Not that I want to discourage you or anything.) It appears that these two tables are simply selected and reformatted from tables at IMDB, which raises the question: Does Wikipedia really need its own copy of an IMDB table, or could we just link to their table from the External links section and avoid the maintenance and vandalism headaches? --Uncia (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry you don't like the tables, but WP:ACTOR uses them. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

As an actress: Oobermind: says her character is Ralena, but IMDB says it is Roxanne Ritchi. Which is correct? Also, shouldn't the note say Voice for this one? --Uncia (talk) 20:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Fixed [on both]. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Awards and nominations

Same comment as for Detailed works: Do we really need our own copy of an IMDB table? I think this table is not even a selection: it shows everything in the IMDB table. --Uncia (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

See Angelina Jolie#Awards, Jon Hamm#Awards and nominations, David Schwimmer#Awards and nominations, etc. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Further reading

Good, no changes needed. --Uncia (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

External links

Good, no changes needed. --Uncia (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

End matter

• Using the Media offices box is incorrect, it is for "people holding posts in the media".
• Categories: American environmentalists - no evidence that she is an American environmentalist

--Uncia (talk) 18:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I removed the category. I'm not so sure what to do with the media box. It was there when I was working on the article. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:34, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:ACTOR says in part, "Succession boxes where the succession box relates to the subject's work or notability as an actor are deprecated." So I think you would be justified in removing the Media offices succession box. --Uncia (talk) 03:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Removed. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Assessment and must-fix items

Whew! Reviewing is a lot of work! This article is within a hairsbreadth of GA status. My assessment:

1. Well-written: Pass. It is clear and grammatically correct and complies with the required MOS sections.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable: Pass. It is thoroughly footnoted, I have checked all the footnotes and the incorrect ones have been corrected. All statements are traced to reliable sources and there is no original research.

3. Broad in its coverage: Pass except for two areas: description of the 30 Rock series is unbalanced and has too much about the pilot, and the lede is technically complete but doesn't capture the spirit of the subject.

4. Neutral: Pass, presents a balanced view of the subject, with a proportionate mixture of positive and negative views.

5. Stable: Pass, no edit wars or content disputes.

6. Illustrated: Pass, has reasonable number of images, with correct licenses and descriptive captions, and they are in the correct sections of the article.

Here's what I propose to you to bring this to GA status:

• Put about one paragraph of material describing 30 Rock as it is running today. Since there are a number of separate articles on the series, we don't need very much, but we need enough that the reader will learn "what the show is about". This would include the sitcom setting, a brief description of the roles and perhaps personalities of the main characters (only the top 3 or 4 main characters, not all the regular characters), any recurrent themes, and the origin of the name 30 Rock. In an ideal world you would be able to plagiarize this from the lede of 30 Rock, but that lede is not very good so you'll have to dig a little. Remember to give sources.
  • Alright, I removed the first two paragraphs. Tell me how you feel about it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Hmm, well, that seems drastic, but it does solve the balance problem. So it's OK. --Uncia (talk) 17:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
• The lede, although accurate and summarizing most of the article, is boring. In summary it says "blah blah appeared in TV series and movies blah blah won awards blah blah", just like lots of other actors. We don't see what's special about Tina Fey that other people don't have. I'll work with you to come up with something about this; we really only need one sentence, but it has to be a sentence that captures what's special about her. One thing that you don't see all the time is comedians appearing on lists of the most influential people and of people who are changing the world, and I think this may be the angle that will show her uniqueness.
  • I wouldn't have a problem adding that she's appeared in the Time 100 to the lead, or that she was Entertainer of the Year by the Associated Press for her Palin impersonation, or the charities she supports. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I think the AP award would be good. The problem I have with the various Top lists is that no one knows what the criteria are. It's an honor to be named to the TIME 100, but what exactly did the person accomplish that got them on the list? Nobody knows. Let's use the AP award, but include that it is given for having the greatest impact on culture and entertainment in 2008 (which is stated in the cited article). --Uncia (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Alright, forget the Time 100 and let's include the AP award. Now, how should it be written? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
        • How about this? Replace the existing sentence in "In the media" with this:

The newspaper editors and broadcast producers of the Associated Press voted Fey the AP Entertainer of the Year as the performer who had the greatest impact on culture and entertainment in 2008, citing her impression of Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live.

Then move the last sentence of the lede first paragraph ("After graduating...") to be the first sentence of the second paragraph, because this is the start of her career and doesn't logically follow her list of awards. Then add this text at the end of the new first paragraph:

She was singled out as the performer who had the greatest impact on culture and entertainment in 2008 by the Associated Press, who gave her their AP Entertainer of the Year award.

--Uncia (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Done [on both]. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Everything is negotiable, so if you don't agree that these are needed improvements we can talk about it. I'll be generous on time too, but I doubt you'll need even the normal seven day period to complete this. Since you have been speedily correcting the problems, I'm not going to put it on hold, I'll just wait until you make these improvements and then I'll pass it. If you can fix the other points I've brought up, that would be great, but the above two items are all that I require for GA. --Uncia (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Article passes GA

This article passes the Good article criteria and I will list it as a Good Article. --Uncia (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the review. I appreciate it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

References

Something from her past which happened to her is not something that is a part of her personal life. Getting attacked is not a hobby or decision or foreseeable result thereof. It belongs right between the part about her family at the beginning of her early life and the part about being exposed to comedy at an early age. Would fit nicely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.53.7 (talk) 05:30, 21 January 2013 (UTC) 208.103.53.7 (talk) 05:40, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Reversion of article

1. 2605:e000:96c0:af00:807c:dbfb:ec44:e105 made this bold edit: (diff1)
2. I reverted it back to the original version (diff2)
3. Monterrosa rereverted my reversion (diff3)

So, what is the consensus, Tina Fey fans? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:15, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Condense filmography

I was editing Tina's filmography section and I was wondering whether we should condense her Saturday Night Live appearances into one row (or maybe two, to separate her appearances as a cast member from her appearances as a host) because currently Saturday Night Live appears five times in the Television Filmography table. So this:

Year	Title	Role	Notes
1998–2006	Saturday Night Live	Various	178 episodes; Also writer
2008	Saturday Night Live	Host	Episode: "Tina Fey/Carrie Underwood"
2010	Saturday Night Live	Host	Episode: "Tina Fey/Justin Bieber"
2011	Saturday Night Live	Host	Episode: "Tina Fey/Ellie Goulding"
2013	Saturday Night Live	Host	Episode: "Tina Fey/Arcade Fire"

would become this:

Year	Title	Role	Notes
1998–2006, 08, 10, 11, 13	Saturday Night Live	Various	178 episodes; Also writer; Host

or this:

Year	Title	Role	Notes
1998–2006,	Saturday Night Live	Various	178 episodes; Also writer;
2008, 10, 11, 13	Saturday Night Live	Various	Host

but that second row could also be:

Year	Title	Role	Notes
2008, 10, 11, 13	Saturday Night Live	Host	4 episodes

or something similar. If anyone has any suggestions then please do add them here. Thank you! Rayna Jaymes (talk) 22:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

30 Rock Awards and Honours

Do these need to be in the 30 Rock piece, given they're already in a section down the bottom? It seem to skew the weight away from what the series is, for someone who doesn't know it. Maybe "Her work on 30 Rock won multiple awards: quick list here"? A bit hard for a reader who doesn't know 30 Rock to work out what made the show good/great? Although I appreciate it does have its own article... AdventurousMe (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Sheet caking

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/18/tina-fey-urges-americans-stay-home-from-neo-nazi-rallies-eat-a-sheet-cake-instead/?utm_term=.9dc4893fbe3d

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2017/08/18/tina-fey-suggests-sheet-caking-as-alternative-to-protesting-far-right-rallies/579143001/

https://www.villagevoice.com/2017/08/18/tina-fey-weekend-update-snl-outrage/

https://munchies.vice.com/en_us/article/3kkk35/tina-feys-sheet-caking-speech-on-snl-provokes-strong-reactions

http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2017/08/tiny_fey_introduces_sheet_caking.html

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2017/08/18/tina_fey_talks_charlottesville_eats_cake.html

http://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/how-bout-this-tina-fey-give-us-black-people-the-she-1797989932

http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/tv/ct-tina-fey-neo-nazi-rallies-eat-a-sheet-cake-instead-20170818-story.html

http://people.com/food/tina-fey-sheet-cake-snl-le-delice-pastry-shop/?xid=email-email-food-2017081815PM-tout1&utm

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/08/let-us-eat-cake/537294/

http://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/tv/article167917682.html

http://ew.com/tv/2017/08/18/tina-fey-cake-weekend-update-reactions/

71.182.242.11 (talk) 04:54, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Tina Fey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120726140635/http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/30/people-beautiful-ents-dc-idUSN3051362720080501 to http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/30/people-beautiful-ents-dc-idUSN3051362720080501

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done Rebbing 09:07, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

• Favorite Books, Movies and Music ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.213.18.125 (talk) 14:44, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Tina Fey. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100710053332/http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/07/emmy-nominations-the-complete-list.html to http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2010/07/emmy-nominations-the-complete-list.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.reuters.com/article/2008/04/30/people-beautiful-ents-dc-idUSN3051362720080501
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090710144000/http://www.afterellen.com/people/2007/6/hotlist to http://www.afterellen.com/people/2007/6/hotlist
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620180933/http://weblogs.variety.com/on_the_air/2010/06/oprah-neil-patrick-harris-tina-fey-to-get-hollywood-walk-of-fame-stars.html to http://weblogs.variety.com/on_the_air/2010/06/oprah-neil-patrick-harris-tina-fey-to-get-hollywood-walk-of-fame-stars.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 02:42, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hypocorism "Tina" is unneeded

Copied from Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biography#Hypocorisms that stem from the beginning of a name not permitted, but one from the end is?: There was a discussion at Talk:Al Capone#Hypocorism "Al" is unneeded where the consensus looks to be in favour of excluding the hypocorism "Al" for the full name Alphonse Gabriel Capone in the lead. In short, I was in favour of keeping it because although "Al" can be a "common English-language hypocorism" (MOS:HYPOCORISM), it is not one for "Alphonse" (not an English name). I seem to have been overruled (pending any last thoughts) by those who think it is not necessary because there will be no seemingly obvious (relative) confusion to a potential reader that the "Al" comes from the first two letters of his given name—I am still in disagreement—but if that's the way it goes, fine. My question comes to the example for that of Tina Fey (used in MOS:FULLNAME—although the structure was changed here recently) permitting "Tina" in Elizabeth Stamatina "Tina" Fey. "Tina" is also a "common English-language hypocorism", and just as "obviously" comes from the last four letters of "Stamatina". Put it this way, if we put both of the names in front of the average reader and ask them to tell us where the hypocorism came from, they would likely be able to deduce where, but I think we should be leaning more towards covering our bases given that they are both non-English names, and any supposed "obviousness" on our part is just WP:OR. So is there a reason that the inclusion of a hypocorism that comes from the last few letters of a name be permitted, but not one from the first few? It was said that "Stamatina has no obvious nickname." According to who? You ask an English speaker, the only plausible one they'll probably come up with is "Tina" even though it is a name that is foreign to them. Although it has also been pointed out that the most common way to create a hypocorism in English is the first syllable, it is not uncommon to have names that go to the last syllable like Robert or Albert to Bert, etc. But again, if "Al" is deemed to be unnecessary there, fine, but by the same regard, "Tina" appears to also go against the MoS by being a "common English-language hypocorism" (regardless of where in the full name it is derived, and also does not specify the language of origin of the name in question). Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:28, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't think "Stamatina" is a commonly encountered name in English, and to me it does not seem obvious that it would become "Tina" in informal usage. The fact that Stamatina is her middle name rather than her first name makes it even more obscure. So I think "Tina" should not be considered a "common English-language hypocorism" per MOS:HYPOCORISM for someone named "Elizabeth Stamatina", unlike the usual situation encountered for nicknames such as "Al", "Bill, "Dave", "Jimmy", "Maggie", "Mike", "Penny", "Sue", etc. Upon very close inspection, the source of "Tina" might become apparent, but such a degree of careful study and inspection should not be necessary for reading a Wikipedia article. The situation might be different if her nickname was "Beth" or "Liz" rather than "Tina". (Please note that "Beth" is derived from the last syllable of "Elizabeth", which is Ms. Fey's first name.) —BarrelProof (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@BarrelProof: Thanks for your response. I found your example of Maggie Smith particularly interesting, as the "common English-language hypocorism" of "Maggie" comes from one of her middle names being "Margret". Therefore, I do not think that the hypocorism coming from Fey's middle name is any less obscure if than if it had come from her first name. "Stamatina" is certainly not a commonly encountered name in English, however, that does not change the fact that its hypocorism "Tina" is a "common English-language hypocorism", to which the MoS makes no implication that the supposed obscurity of a name plays a role in any way. Unfortunately, in its current form, there is no policy basis that would permit the usage of "Tina". Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 22:14, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I agree that it is not especially unusual for a nickname to come from a middle name. I did not mean to imply otherwise. I just think that it is not so obvious to most English language readers that someone named "Elizabeth Stamatina" would be known as "Tina". My impression is that the relationship between "Margaret" and "Maggie" is more familiar than that between "Stamatina" and "Tina". I agree that if one reads it carefully, it can be discerned, but I'm not so sure that Wikipedia readers should be expected to make that inference by themselves. Please note, however, that Maggie Smith's first name is "Margaret" – that is not just "one of her middle names". (And it's "Margaret", not "Margret".) The word that appears before "Margaret" at the beginning of the article about her is "Dame". That's an honorific title, not a given name. Please see the article on the title Dame. —BarrelProof (talk) 22:28, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

I agree with BarrelProof. While Tina is a common hypocorism for Christina, it's not a common when derived from Stamatina. We should go with what is the most clear for an unobservant reader, which is to include "Tina". Cerebral726 (talk) 22:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@BarrelProof: My mistake—Dame, the honorific title, was not the first thing that came to mind when I read that—wiki links cannot be in boldface, which is unfortunate in this case because other idiots like me have probably thought that that was her first name! I just think that it is not so obvious to most English language readers that someone named "Elizabeth Stamatina" would be known as "Tina". I think that this is a fair point. By the same token, I also just don't think that we should be making the inference for the reader that a common English-language hypocorism like "Al" is common for non-English names like Alphonse, Alfonso, Alfredo, etc, which fundamentally also do not have a familiar relationship when other hypocorisms like Fofò are often more common. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 23:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@Vaselineeeeeeee: Are you fully in favor of not repeating "Tina" in the lead sentence, or is this an extension of the rationale for first-syllable hypocorisms used at Talk:Al Capone#Hypocorism_"Al"_is_unneeded, which you were against?—Bagumba (talk) 07:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

@Bagumba: I am not fully in favour of not repeating "Tina", however, I would like some consistency with what is enforced here under this policy, and since "Al" is being deemed as unnecessary per the MoS, I also see no MoS reason indicating that "Tina" be permitted. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

In Capone's case, "Al" is a first-syllable nickname, which are common in English. For Fey, "Tina" is from the last—not first—syllable.—Bagumba (talk) 19:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Bagumba, I see you changed the opening sentence back after another user changed it (someone had also changed the MoS according to reflect that change). "Tina" is a nickname, so Elizabeth Stamatina "Tina" Fey would be the appropriate method to display this (if "Tina" were to be kept). Answer me this: How does the example of Elizabeth Stamatina "Tina" Fey fit in with the "First mention" MoS alongside Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz and Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi which much more adequately show the use of "first mention" unlike Fey due to the insertion of her nickname there (not a true first mention in comparison to these two figures). Don't you think Elizabeth Stamatina "Tina" Fey would play much better in the "Pseudonyms, stage names, nicknames, hypocorisms, and common names" section to illustrate her nickname—being a much clearer defining feature? I challenge you to find an appropriate place to fit her. Along with "Bunny Berigan has: Roland Bernard "Bunny" Berigan."? That's the closest to Elizabeth Stamatina "Tina" Fey. I mean, if "Tina" isn't common, it would fit there, right? Why wasn't it put there? Why was it forced into "First mention" even though it is not following the MoS "the article should start with the complete version."? Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 16:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

If the issue is the organization of the MOS page, that is best discussed at the MOS. I was unaware that there was a Fey example there, but have made the MOS consistent again with a quoted Tina. Thanks for pointing that out.—Bagumba (talk) 19:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Whether "Tina" gets repeated or not, please don't imply it's a stage name. It's her nickname, and I have added text and citations to reflect that, as well as removed the misleading "known professionally" phrasing.[4] Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 11:39, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

@WWGB: For your interest. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 17:47, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Saved a man's life

More than one source, CNN, BBC credit Fey for saving a man's life. Somebody else, not me, put this edit in but I fixed it a little. Somebody else removed it and said to take it to talk.

On December 17, 2020, Tina Fey announced on the tonight show that she had saved a mans life by the Hudson River by calling the police

Vowvo (talk) 00:18, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

USAUKAustraliaSingaporeIndia

Additional references found, making it one of the most referenced facts in this article. Vowvo (talk) 00:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Just because it is heavily covered by many news outlets for an isolated period of time does not make said info a must to include in the article. We have to consider WP:DUEWEIGHT, and this is something that may be undue. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 02:03, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Some Wikipedia editors disagree because they have improved and slightly expanded this fact. Undue weight is always a consideration for all Wikipedia edits. However, if one is too strict, lots of Wikipedia articles would be deleted. Lenny Skutnik and Mauro Cía were heavily covered (or barely covered in the case of Cia for an isolated period of time and are no longer covered. See, Wikipedia's criteria of undue weight is not given a lot of weight, just a little. Reliable sources are given far more weight. Vowvo (talk) 20:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Npow.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)