[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Snooki

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Author? Oh please

[edit]

Someone else noted that her first book was something of a failure - although curiously it seems to have made the NYT Bestsellers list.

Ghostwriting is so commonplace these days we're in serious danger of eroding the idea that writing takes time, effort and some degree of skill. In fact, reading between the lines it appears that the real author is another lady, presumably someone at Simon & Schuster as Snookie clearly alludes to her getting her ideas down on paper. We can't prove that Snooki didn't write this book - but the only "proof" we have is that her name appears on the front. Surely that isn't hard evidence of anything now. Smidoid (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

someone fix that typo..

[edit]

SHE had a segment with John Morrison on Monday Night Raw at WWE ... :/ माधवपंडित (talk) 12:46, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

[edit]

{{Old AfD multi| daSNOOKI:)the "Endorsements" section? Shouldn't that link be at the bottom of the page, with just a mention of the slippers elsewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.113.196 (talk) 03:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The slippers should be removed from linking to a commercial site. Maybe reword it if that's important. Should be changed at the very least. --Cohen2011 (talk) 22:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She appearantly OD'ed today: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Snooki/150844444955205 82.157.219.55 (talk) 11:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dick move, getting peoples' hope up like that. TheArchaeologist (talk) 07:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Snooki LIVES!

Can someone change Snooki's picture?She does not look like that anymore. Kelly Raspberry (talk) 13:56, 10 December 2015 (ET) KellyRaspberry (talk) 20:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why...

[edit]

Does she have her own wiki page an not the others???

She is the most famous.. along with "The Situation". --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 03:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rutgers Speech

[edit]

Should this be included? http://www.businessinsider.com/snooki-rutgers-2011-4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.126.150.154 (talk) 13:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a Rutgers Student and this is not exactly accurate information. She was paid two do two separate Comedy/Entertainment shows at Rutgers, not a single speech. The shows were non-academic entertainment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.151.130.69 (talk) 04:48, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reliable source stating what she was paid "two"(sic) do? - SummerPhD (talk) 04:55, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SNL Impression

[edit]

I might as well fill this tab 'cause no one else has. She is spoofed/impersonated on Saturday Night Live by Bobby Moynihan in drag.--The Wing Dude, Musical Extraordinaire (talk) 04:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And that is encyclopedic in what way? Should we also include in Albert Einstein's article where he stubbed his toe? Each time HE was also impersonated? NOTABLE is the notion here, not one mention (though, it was several times tonight, with one drag impersonation on SNL), still not noteworthy, as many, many, many, many people do not watch SNL, nor does SNL have major impacts in the world or the US.24.127.137.154 (talk) 05:24, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

[edit]

This page is very poorly written... can anybody clean it up??

Isn't that just art imitating life? Elecmahm (talk) 13:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

^Best quote ever. How exactly could this page be cleaned up? Do people think it still needs cleaning? TheArchaeologist (talk) 07:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Birthdate

[edit]

where did we get her birthdate? IMDB gives a different one [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.149.100.10 (talk) 18:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC) sister is jade miley[reply]

ok, her birthdate is officially incorrect [[2]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.149.100.10 (talk) 19:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Her birthdate is indeed incorrect, if anyone can find the right one, just put it up there. --Olijven (talk) 18:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

seriously? does it really matter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.241.143.189 (talk) 23:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whether it is correct or incorrect, her birth date will still be around November. LunaHunting (talk) 10:22, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Chilean"?

[edit]

Looking at her height and ethnic features, she is most likely NOT of European descent, but rather a predominantly Amerindian mix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Werrew3 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How, exactly, does one have a "slight" ancestry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackArawn (talk • contribs) 23:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Per the above request for clarity I reviewed the source. Our article had phrased it as Polizzi saying of herself she has "slight" ancestry; and if that is what the source quoted Polizzi as saying, it could have stayed. But the source itself was not really clear on that matter with a whole lot of unattributed quotes thrown out there and the source itself does not appear to meet our WP:RS guidelines for reliable sources (yes it is hosted by NBC but there is no indication of editorial oversite of this content.) So I have removed the claim from the article. Active Banana (bananaphone 23:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tanning

[edit]

The article is protected but the hyperlink "tanning" should re-direct to sun tanning rather than leather tanning. Also I would consider modifying the personal life section as I doubt she is currently in community college. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.126.67.45 (talk) 00:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thank you for reporting. Efcmagnew (talk) 03:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is that tan even fake? If she's Chilean and is indeed of Amerindian descent, then she must be naturally brown to some degree. I high doubt all of her skin color comes SOLELY from tanning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.177.20 (talk) 06:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not all Chileans are brown (quite a few are not) and the ones that are very to a great extent in skin colour depending on how much their ancestors mixed with the Mapuche. Hell, she might even have a little Palestinian in here. You won't actually know unless you can find a pic of her as a young child, just look for the poof in the family photo. TheArchaeologist (talk) 07:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"just look for the poof in the family photo." sure you did not mean to write that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.41.39.207 (talk) 12:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that, IP poster? DO you refuse science and growth stages of humans?24.127.137.154 (talk) 05:26, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting

[edit]

Active Banana (talk · contribs) redirected Nicole Polizzi arguing that the person is only notable per WP:BLP1E. That particular part of policy talks about "one event", and Jersey Shore is a recurring event, not a one-shot event. In addition, Snooki has been discussed apart from the show itself. We should address BLP concerns in terms of article content, but considering that there was an AfD that resulted in no consensus and that she has had coverage since, it is too rash to redirect. Please discuss the validity of the article here. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To add to my argument, there are currently headlines specifically about Snooki and her trademark application, so this demonstrates she is not a "low-profile individual" like WP:BLP1E says. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
She is by now notable by herself apart from Jersey Shore, more so than the other cast members at this point. Tabercil (talk) 15:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Show me anything that isnt because of her reality show appearances? --Active Banana | bananaphone 14:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:1E explains what "one event" means, and Jersey Shore is not at all like the examples used. In addition, we need to remember WP:BASIC, a person can be notable if he or she has received significant independent coverage. This is an example indicating such coverage, calling her "the breakout member of the cast". Per WP:BLP1E, she is not "a low-profile individual" nor plans to be one (as reflected by the attempt to trademark "Snooki"). We should ensure this article's content complies with WP:BLP, but the figure is notable for her own article. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From your source "It’s another day in the kitchen of Andy Polizzi — volunteer firefighter, auto salvage manager and father of Nicole Polizzi, the 4-foot-9-inch Snooki, yowling star of “Jersey Shore". Her notability is completely and solely because of the reality show. IF a year from the show she is still making headlines about things not related to the show, then sure, but that is not the case now. --Active Banana | bananaphone 15:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We can agree that she reached fame because of Jersey Shore. WP:BLP1E says, "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." It is not directly applicable to treat Jersey Shore as a single event because it is obviously recurring. Even so, if we treat Jersey Shore as a single event, the person has to be covered only in the context of the TV show and be "a low-profile individual". So what does "context of a single event" mean? If we talked about reviews and recaps of a Jersey Shore episode in which she is mentioned, that to me is that kind of context. However, we are seeing her more directly profiled than any other cast member, as she is "the breakout member". (I could see your argument being better applied to the other members, but I'd have to research them.) When we talk about low-profile individuals, in my opinion, these are individuals who remain private (or try to remain private). My impression is that we avoid creating articles on them out of respect for that. However, with this figure being profiled and pursuing celebrity status, the person is not trying to keep private. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"It is not directly applicable to treat Jersey Shore as a single event because it is obviously recurring" completely ludicrous statement. It is one TV series and promotional events related solely to the one tv series. Period. Active Banana ( bananaphone 13:30, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not WP:BLP1E applies, this article is currently low value. It's poorly put together and adds very little that can't be found in Jersey Shore. If there's so little information out there about her now, this article should probably just be merged back into Jersey Shore. If she continues to be achieve outside of that scope, then having a separate article is warranted. Agentchuck (talk) 20:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's lots of info out there, no one has added it is all. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 15:44, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

semi protection

[edit]

There seems to be a large amount of vandalism to the article. Every time I log into wikipedia I see someone vandalizing this article or reverting vandalism. Would semi protection help this at all. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 04:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page is undergoing "Pending Changes" protection. There is no need to add semi-protection or protection to the page. --Sweet xxTalk 17:14, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

user:Active Banana has twice (here and here) added the {{notability}} and {{mergeto}} templates. My understanding of the Notability guidelines is that if someone gets independent coverage then notability is established. Citing WP:BLP1E may be valid if the only reason the article was created was due to her legal issues, but that is certainly not the case (article was created way before her legal troubles). It therefore seems to be a mis-citing of the WP:BLP1E guidelines. However whatever (talk) 17:26, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But there isnt "independent coverage outside of the notoriety she has recieved related to the Jersey Shore". There is not one notable thing about her that is not directly related to that reality show and its publicity department. Active Banana ( bananaphone 17:29, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need for "independent coverage outside of the notoriety she has received related to the Jersey Shore". The need is for independent coverage outside of Jersey Shore (i.e. secondary sources), and she certainly has that. However whatever (talk) 17:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BLP1E: "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." I see no evidence at this time that she is anything other than a flash in the pan gossip tabloid headliner. If and when she does something notable outside of the publicity from the Jersey Shore, THEN she can have her stand alone article. Active Banana ( bananaphone 17:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you are misapplying BLP1E, since Jersey Shore is not an "event" — it's a show. The incident at Seaside Heights is an event. However whatever (talk) 17:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is SO one event - one television series. Just like a band member whose band plays numerous concerts but has recieved no coverage outside of the band doesnt have a stand alone article, a cast member of a TV show who has no third party coverage outside of that TV show doesnt get a stand alone article. Active Banana ( bananaphone 18:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Above, three editors (including myself) disagree with this. The article is still under-developed and has the possibility of development. Perhaps the direct coverage of this figure would be clearer if someone made the effort. There are a variety of profiling links above this discussion. Erik (talk | contribs) 17:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Under development since January and you still have not been able to find/add content for notability outside of Jersey Shore? When you find it and add it THEN it can be stand alone. Active Banana ( bananaphone 18:13, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I showed you this as an example, but you think that it doesn't count even though it profiles her directly. I'm not interested in working on the article, but I am interested in making sure that there is an article to be had. You already redirected to Jersey Shore once. Erik (talk | contribs) 18:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did read it - did you? it ALL and ONLY about her relationship and notoriety because of Jersey Shore. Active Banana ( bananaphone 18:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
it ALL and ONLY about her relationship and notoriety because of Jersey Shore. Like I said, you think that it doesn't count even though it profiles her directly. Jersey Shore is obviously mentioned in context; it would be amiss otherwise. Of course there's a relationship between them. You think that a TV show, even with recurring seasons, is "one event". Actual examples shown are not based on films or TV shows, and WP:EVENT further evidences that. Erik (talk | contribs) 18:45, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The ONLY context is The Jersey Shore. If the only context for a musician were as part of a band there would be no stand alone article. If the only context for an actor is a single film or TV series, there would not be a stand alone article. Period.Active Banana ( bananaphone 19:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that user:Active Banana's arguments that she is only notable for Jersey Shores completely fall apart by the fact that she also appeared in "Is She Really Going Out With Him?". I hope that's the end of this discussion. However whatever (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no third party coverage of that event. Active Banana ( bananaphone 18:10, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a reference. However whatever (talk) 18:44, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And again note the context: The Jersey Shore girl was in another MTV reality show last year., but it is third party coverage of a different event. Active Banana ( bananaphone 13:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that she's achieved a large enough degree of broad awareness for who she is period to be notable in her own right. For example, you have things like Republican candidates being asked who she is. Tabercil (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree

[edit]

Why does this girl have her own page and not the others. Maybe those Jersey Shore cast peeps shold add theirs also, you know, by themselves. Cuz if somebody else does, they make put false things on the page. Wikipedians like accuracy in their articles. ----Braelynhail —Preceding unsigned comment added by Braelynhail (talk • contribs) 21:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because they dont have non-trivial coverage about them in reliable sources other than in relation to their connection with the show. Active Banana (bananaphone 21:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For the bulk of the csat, I would agree. However, I would argue there are two exceptions: Snooki and the Situation; the former as argued above, and the latter because of Dancing with the Stars Tabercil (talk) 21:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would strongly discourage giving these people any more attention than they already get or exposing other people to this horror unless they actively seek the information. Lord knows that any respectable Italian American considering a run for President will have to push it back for another twenty years. Snooki also appears to be the one that everyone focuses on either because she is so annoying, strange or idk what. I cannot actually watch this showcase of the trash that inhabits my city's (NYC) landfill (NJ). TheArchaeologist (talk) 06:58, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this girl have a page when she has contributed nothing to society. Apparently she passes the rigorous tests of wiki but a man named Robert Cathcart does not. He's the one that invented the hip-ball joint replacement thats used today. America is really in a sad state of affairs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.85.176.179 (talk) 15:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because notability is not about "contributing to society". Pick an evil dictator or mass murderer from history. They are likely notable, though they did not contribute to society. She's famous and discussed a lot in the press. That does the trick. If you feel Robert Cathcart meets our notability requirements, feel free to either add him to Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation or, better yet, create an account for yourself, get to know our policies a bit, then create the article yourself. Feel free to contact me on my talk page for assistance. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Pick an evil dictator or mass murderer from history. They are likely notable, though they did not contribute to society..." If a person did pick an evil dictator or mass murderer from history, it is unquestionable that they DID contribute to society- they just contributed negatively instead of positively. 216.135.213.106 (talk) 16:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

South Park

[edit]

Snooki was featured on an episode of South Park which aired on October 13, 2010. The episode heavily mocks Snooki and her MTV program, "Jersey Shore". Snooki is drawn as a rat-like creature with the catchphrase, "Snooki want smush-smush!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Egch080108 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a picture from that episode, as to show the extremes of the parodies about her.72.45.203.22 (talk) 04:06, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://sunsetentertainmentnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Snooki-South-Park.png == wish granted, looks better than the real one imo. TheArchaeologist (talk) 06:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious.....Snooki listed as an Italian Chilean

[edit]

Wikipedia's definition of Italian Chilean is specifically "Chileans of full or predominately Italian descent."

The source used in Nicole Polizzi's article claiming she's Italian Chilean is a second hand account of an interview Joy Behar had with the Jersey Shore cast members (I'm not even sure it's a reliable source) http://www.ivillage.com/joy-behar-jersey-shore-cast-view/1-a-118100#ixzz134SxcSIk where the statement is made (and it's not clear by whom) quote, Turns out Snooki is "more of a Chilean" and a little bit Sicilian -- "but not that much", unquote. There are no reliable sources that I could find online which stated Snooki had any Italian (or Sicilian) heritage. Reliable sources simply state she was born in Chile and was adopted by an Italian American family.

To clarify, I'm not arguing that Sicilians should not be included as Italians...my argument is that "a little bit Sicilian but not that much" is nowhere near close enough to "predominately" for her to be included as an Italian Chilean. There is also no actual reliable source that she has any Italian or Sicilian blood whatsoever. Slinkybinky (talk) 09:15, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NEW INFO UPDATE...I found the video of the Snooki exchange with Joy Behar on a BET blog http://blogs.bet.com/entertainment/staytuned/jersey-shore-meets-the-view/ It can also be found on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw4NPAM4iNQ

This is the dialogue, in part:

Joy Behar: I'd like to point out that Snooki is not Italian

Sherri Shepherd: What are you?

Elisabeth Hasselbeck: Are you part Italian?

Snooki: Sicilian but more of a Chilean.

Joy Behar: Oh you are part Sicilian? Well that would make you Italian.

Snooki: But not that much

Joy Behar: Not that much?

Snooki: I'm more of a Chilean

Because of Snooki self-describing herself basically as just a little bit Italian, I don't think she should be listed as Italian Chilean since that describes someone who is full or mostly Italian.Slinkybinky (talk) 18:36, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I came back to check to see if there was any discussion here and found that another editor removed Italian Chilean from Snooki's article. That was my only concern and I'm pleased with the revision.Slinkybinky (talk) 06:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Chilean" can be a number of different ancestries and it is highly doubtful that she would know her actual heritage or her family would have cared enough to find it out, so her words in an interview are dodgy at best. TheArchaeologist (talk) 07:01, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She's not Sicilian, (removed BLP violation) doesn't understand the concept of ethnicity. When filling out forms that request information on race, she's previously stated that she marks 'other' and then proceeds to write in 'tan'. (removed BLP violation) I'd assume her parents are (full/part) Sicilian and she's mistakenly refered to the cultural influence as being part of her ethnic makeup. 74.96.253.64 (talk) 05:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ex-boyfriends

[edit]

"LaValle has chosen to stay out of the public eye, unlike Snooki’s previous two boyfriends, Jeff Miranda and Emilio Masella, who continuously attempted to get their names and faces in the media."

Does this need a citation?

Senor El Presidente (talk) 13:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, just removal. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 13:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Early Life Section

[edit]

One does not study to be a veterinarian at a community college, this only occurs at an accredited school of veterinary medicine. She may aspire to be a veterinarian, and may be taking coursework at a community college to further her application to veterinary school, if so the section should be edited to reflect this.

However, a Google search for "snooki veterinarian" seems to indicate that she is actually purusing a veterinary technology degree to be licensed as a veterinary technician. This is very distinct from a veterinarian.

--Jlabes (talk) 11:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, as entry into veterinary colleges are at levels that require pistols at dawn for entry amongst competitors, a veterinary technician would have some prerequisites under their belts. Just as some choose an RN or PA, on the way to MD.24.127.137.154 (talk) 05:32, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If reliable sources say she is studying to be a vet tech, she is studying to be a vet tech. If reliable sources say she is studying to be a vet, she is studying to be a vet. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dwarfism?

[edit]

Is she a dwarf?184.59.7.32 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Well according to the article on Dwarfism, yes I guess she is, as she is just one inch below the maximum height. Is it a result of some sort of medical condition? It couldn't be malnutrition, she looks pretty well-fed. TheArchaeologist (talk) 06:55, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She IS a dwarf.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.61.174.164 (talk) 14:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If reliable sources say she is a dwarf, she is a dwarf. If reliable sources do not say she is a dwarf, she is not a dwarf.- SummerPhD (talk) 02:04, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uh...no...if reliable sources do not say she is a dwarf, it means nothing can be said either way--if reliable sources say that she is not a dwarf, THAT would mean she is not a dwarf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.128.193 (talk) 10:55, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For the non-U.S. part of the world

[edit]

Except Burma, Liberia and U.S.A. the metric system is the legal unit system in the rest of the world (3 to 189 countries and 363M to 6.7B people). So I guess to ANY measure of any kind expressed in imperial should be asided by the metric correspondig quantity in a worldwide encyclopedia such as Wikipedia. In this case I'm talking about her weight (80 lbs ca. 36 kg). If this article was not protected I'd have just modified it, but if an admin blocks an article, I guess (s)he should mind these kind of details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.52.126.191 (talk) 14:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since this article is about an american it is written with american english and american units. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk 03:58, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree with Guerillero. If u want to use metrics, it should be secondary information (ie, in parenthesis). Angry bee (talk) 02:47, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The original anon seems to have been saying that the metrics should be given as secondary information. john k (talk) 03:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why is there any issue over putting it in parenthesis for the metric system? Honestly, Wikipedians argue over some of the tiniest problems some times. TheArchaeologist (talk) 06:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bollocks

[edit]

{{editsemiprotected}}

The 4 ft 9 in (1.45 m) Polizzi attributes maintaining her position as a cheerleader partly led to her disorder.[1]

This pitiful attempt at writing a sentence makes no damn sense, and anyway, the cite says no such thing. -- 99.164.111.40 (talk) 08:06, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done Removed. Not verified in source provided. -Atmoz (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Snooki of 'Jersey Shore' Battled an Eating Disorder". ivillage.com.

Her book is fiction

[edit]

It does not depict her search for love on The Shore, but instead that of fictional characters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.104.124.199 (talk) 02:29, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a possibility to delete when no one cares anymore?

[edit]

I know she's all notable now etc and functions as a punching bag, but when her career dries up and her pack of idiots got heir separate ways is it possible to expunge this article from the encyclopedia? I would consider it a public service really. Either that or redirect to the article on the blight upon our land that was their show? TheArchaeologist (talk) 07:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NTEMP. Sorry! :) Erik (talk | contribs) 01:35, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, wait, there's still hope: "While notability itself is not temporary, from time to time re-assessment of the evidence of notability or suitability of existing articles may be requested by any user via a deletion discussion, or new evidence may arise for articles previously deemed unsuitable. As a result articles may be proposed for deletion or recreated months or even years after being earlier considered". Now it just needs to be proposed at the right time with the right arguments to convince people. =p TheArchaeologist Say Herro 02:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In theory, maybe... but I think you're probably going to have to wait a long time for that occur (if ever). I mean years at 'minimum, if not decades... Tabercil (talk) 02:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...and (continuing from your elipsis, not ...ing you) when that day comes, I hope someone who has a good deal of free time will be there to argue for her deletion. TheArchaeologist Say Herro 03:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, offhand I think the odds of that occuring have dropped to near zero since she's the cover girl of a upcoming Rolling Stone magazine - see here. Rolling Stone... Wanna see my picture on the cover... Rolling Stone... Wanna buy five copies for my mother..." Tabercil (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe if they decide to purge the most useless articles at some point then to save on costs. This should be one. =p TheArchaeologist Say Herro 22:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Sylvieuh, 8 March 2011

[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}}

She is 4 foot 9. Sylvieuh (talk) 05:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a topic about her being a dwarf up top. She actually does qualify: dwarfism. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie, AKA TheArchaeologist Say Herro 05:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Found a reference and added her height to the infobox. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page. You might instead want to put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk, or put the {{edit semi-protected}} template back up on this page and either way someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 13:59, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Vangaroo, 11 March 2011

[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} please change that snookie was studying to be a "veterinarian" to "veterinary technician." It is completely wrong, as a technician holds a certificate, while a veterinarian is an actual medical doctor with a doctorate in veterinary medicine. There are less than 30 universities that offer veterinary degrees, and non of them are junior colleges. Also - she attended a junior college. Junior colleges are only licensed to train veterinary technicians. Snooki was studying to be a veterinary technician. the source cited for the "veterinarian" comment actually states that the correct course of study was "veterinary technician."


Vangaroo (talk) 03:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC) [1] [2][reply]

Done Stickee (talk) 12:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/fashion/25Snooki.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1
  2. ^ http://www.aavmc.org/

Edit request from Burns, 31 May 2011

[edit]

{{edit semi-protected}} Snooki's car accident did indeed injure several people, at least two of which were hospitalized. Reference: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304563104576353810943734854.html#articleTabs=article . The very early attempt to pass it off as a injury-free incident was clearly made by someone who shares a (Dare I say it) representative interest in her hairspray-fueled mock-Italian mediagarchy. Or one of her agents.

Quotation marks

[edit]

I know I don't have the power to edit this page, but to anybody that does have it, please please read on. When a quote ends a sentence the last set of quotation marks go AFTER the period. And after a comma for that matter if the sentence continues. This is probably a page read by millions of people and you (wikipedia) look ridiculous when very basic grammar rules aren't followed. This is not a minor edit because this is the only page I've seen this on and I would like it fixed. 20sanders19 (talk) 08:15, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely right, except for the parts you got wrong. Putting aside the issue of grammar rules not including orthographical issues, punctuation generally goes inside the quotation marks. Please indicate which of sections you feel have problems. Thanks. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"A Shore Thing" and "Confessions of a Guidette"

[edit]

"Despite a promotional campaign that included appearances by Polizzi on The View, The Ellen DeGeneres Show, Jimmy Kimmel Live and The Late Show with David Letterman, the book was not a sales success, selling approximately 9,000 copies within its first month of release, during which it accumulated 16 one-star customer reviews on Amazon.com. One publishing executive attributes the book's sales to the fact that "rather than a tell-all, it was disguised as a novel."[17][18]"

This point about her first book is definitely true, however, the book WAS a NY Times bestseller in its first week, and while the book may be terrible and it ultimately failed, I do feel it's noteworthy to include that the book did earn that "prestige". A quick Google search verifies it, as does this: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/02/fashion/noticed-celebrity-books-and-ghostwriters.html NY Times article.

Additionally, she has put out a second book called "Confessions of a Guidette" which is categorized as a biography, as opposed to being passed off as fiction like "A Shore Thing". It has a technical release date of October 25, 2011 (today) but has actually been available in stores for over a week, due to it not being a publisher restricted title. I work at a bookstore. Xprivate eyex (talk) 08:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Naming consistency in article - "origin of nickname"?

[edit]

I just noticed that some paragraphs refer to her as 'Polizzi' and others as 'Snooki'. I presume convention is to use the official surname except under special circumstances. There is/was a discussion over which name should be used in the article on Ada Lovelace - given that 'Ada' is arguably as well known if not more so). For that matter, where did the name (nickname?) 'Snooki' come from anyway? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.142.231 (talk) 21:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found and corrected one instance of "Snooki" that should have been "Polizzi". The rest of the article seems to be OK on this front. The origin of the nickname is covered in the "Early life" section. - SummerPhD (talk) 04:26, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Perhaps we could also list her other nicknames as well, for instance, she is known as the New Jersey Pig Monster on Yahoo chat forums concerning articles of her...

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.255.70 (talk) 20:22, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what about ignoring the legal troubles she had for for killing a girl? by getting a girl drunk and then let her drive? http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2010/03/world-exclusive-jersey-shores-snooki-was-charged-teens-drunk-driving-death — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.29.40.201 (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or what about getting more reliable sources to corroborate that? -- MST☆R (Chat Me!) 06:12, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pregnant

[edit]

The article declares, almost as factual, that she is pregnant. Not only has she not come out and admitted this information, but there is no actual evidence of her being pregnant besides an anonymous "source", which is anything but factual. 50.90.23.89 (talk) 00:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree and removed. ReelAngelGirl Talk to me! Tea? 00:58, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@PatrickA.Tagle35 I don't understand how those statements are fact. "A source" said that but neither Snookie nor her boyfriend released anything in the refs. ReelAngelGirl Talk to me! Tea? 14:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the ref is states that "a source" said she was pregnant. I don't see how that is reliable. I changed it back until this is sorted out. ReelAngelGirl Talk to me! Tea? 14:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uncited "source" derived information do not belong here. Or should I create an article on myself and have the writer claim that a source proclaims me God? Uncited is nonexistent until citation is provided, hence, should be removed.24.127.137.154 (talk) 05:36, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name of article

[edit]

Surely this page should be 'Snooki' and not 'Nicole Polizzi'? I've never seen this girl on TV or anything (couldn't tell you what she sounds like, who her boyfriend is etc), but even I know 'Snooki'. Never heard of 'Nicole Polizzi'. Will the 'Lady Gaga' article be renamed to 'Stefani Germanotta'? 81.106.127.99 (talk) 17:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, but EACH should redirect to the person of note. We don't place an article for Prince under his stage name, a separate article under The Person Formerly Kwown as Prince or the half dozen OTHER names he's used, each would AND SHOULD redirect to his article, if the person of interest is the musician. Or should we now have a half dozen articles for each pseudonym, which means 4 at least for Doctor Seuss (and his real name and pseudonyms)?24.127.137.154 (talk) 05:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our guidelines state that we generally use "(t)he most common name for a subject...the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources". As a result, we have Sting (musician) with a redirect at Gordon Sumner, Cher, Bill Clinton, etc. Yes, it's at Prince (musician), his "most common name" is sources, not "Prince Rogers Nelson", "TAFKAP", etc. The reliable sources in this article lean heavily on "Snooki". Second place is "Nicole 'Snooki' Polizzi". "Nicole Polizzi" is, tellingly, rare. The heavy usage of "Nicole 'Snooki' Polizzi", to me, says that the press realizes that virtually no one knows the name "Nicole Polizzi" and add the "Snooki" part to clarify who they are writing about. IMO, this should be moved to Snooki. - SummerPhD (talk) 02:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with SummerPhD, The redirect should be switched in favor of her nickname Snooki per WP:COMMONNAME.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 00:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any other opinions before I move this? - SummerPhD (talk) 03:32, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how without a sysop, the move tab isn't there.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 08:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Odd. I have one (and it's not like you're new). A moot point here, in any case, as we could certainly get a sysop to move it to follow a consensus. - SummerPhD (talk) 13:03, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I asked an Admin for an evaluation of the policy in terms of the article name, I don't think consensus is an issue if it is a matter of policies and guidelines. that is even if a hundred people wanted the Bill Clinton article to be called William Jefferson Clinton, It shouldn't happen..▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 18:28, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I'm just briefly allowing room for any argument that Snooki isn't the common name or anything else I might have missed. I fully expect to move this article, but there's always room for dissent and there's no reason to rush. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's very sensible, however if there any agreement to the contrary i haven't it ,I came to this article by accident, I saw on a news talk show that she wasn't Italian by heritage which surprise me, so i searched Wikipedia 'Snooki' and was surprised that Snooki was the re-direct, i had no idea her name is Nicole Polizzi and i doubt most people less major fans of the show do.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 04:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've been asked [3] to comment on this. It seems to me that WP:UCN does apply here, and so the move from Snooki to Nicole Polizzi was in error, and the edit summary moved Snooki to Nicole Polizzi: Proper name seems to support the theory that the person moving the article just didn't have any idea of the Wikipedia policy on article names. We could take this to WP:RM, but while admins are expected to be a bit less bold when using sysop powers, if there's a strong consensus to support moving it back I'd be happy to invoke WP:SNOW here and just move it back to Snooki. Andrewa (talk) 00:32, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would ask Nicole Polizzi fans or fans of the show to keep in mind that this it is policy on the wiki with public names, Lady GaGa fans may be aware of who Stefani Germanotta is but the vest public would not hence the redirect when you click her link.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 01:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 12 March 2012

[edit]

es:Nicole Polizzi Lordjano (talk) 15:25, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done, that page has been deleted on es:wikipedia--Jac16888 Talk 18:18, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Veterinarian / Veterinary Technician

[edit]

The link spanning the last two words, first paragraph, section "Personal life" should be amended. It says "Veterinary Technician", but links to Veterinarian. The correct page that covers veterinary technicians, vet. nurses, and vet. assistants is Paraveterinary workers, to which said link should point. Thank you.

Done RudolfRed (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding punch animation to the article

[edit]

This person is most notably known for being attacked while on the show, as the footage in question has been released to the public domain to be reproduced freely, it should be added to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve348 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no context for the inclusion of this animation. Without this, its inclusion seems gratuitous. fishhead64 (talk) 17:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The context is her career, she became famous for being punched in the face. Just like presidents are famous for being elected, Snooki is famous for getting decked in the face. 216.149.187.98 (talk) 19:26, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Height

[edit]

Could an established editor please add her height to the Infobox? It's well established that her height is 4 ft 9 in (1.45 m). (In fact, it was mentioned again on DWTS on 2013-09-16.)

Genetics

[edit]

I feel like an idiot for even reading this article, but I noticed this about her genetics test: "Middle Eastern (also likely correlating to her Romani ancestry via Middle Easterners who share that ancestry)" That makes no sense. Middle Eastern ancestry would be due to her Jewish ancestry. Gypsys are not Middle Eastern. Also, the statement isn't sourced. FunkMonk (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's ever gonna be updated, but she was tested in early 2019 by 23AndMe, which is supposedly a more reliable test, and she got zero Indian heritage so no gypsy. However she tested as 61.5% Asian and Native American, with almost all of that being Native American from Chile. This ancestry was not reported in the previous test, but it's her major ancestry. The test is on YouTube, posted by user "Jersey Shore". link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbU3Snfwcoo 109.56.116.47 (talk) 05:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fair to point out the possibility of her first DNA test being someone else's. Nobody can have that much divergence between two tests. Also, the 23&Me test is rather generic but I think it gives a fairly accurate representation of her ancestry overall. The first test looks like an error and may have been from someone else entirely.--47.154.83.239 (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT Tags?

[edit]

Is there any sources that she is in fact a lesbian or bisexual? Sucking face with someone of the same sex while drunk does not automatically get one in the club. 108.248.24.226 (talk) 01:36, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appearance in Supernatural

[edit]

Her appearance in Supernatural should be mentioned in the Other Television Appearances (or whatever its called) section since she appeared there and it was actually kinda funny.--32.214.195.155 (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2016

[edit]

Please remove Category:American Romani people and Category:American people of Romani descent off Snooki's article. Snooki was not raised in the Roma (Gypsy) culture. The DNA test might be inaccurate. 104.173.66.43 (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. The source asserts that she has Romani descent. It's not Wikipedia's place to question the validity of the source. clpo13(talk) 23:27, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Typo: Last name of third child should be "LaValle" not "LaVelle" 75.73.118.185 (talk) 14:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality in lede? Shouldn't she just be described as being "American"

[edit]

@Sundayclose: - I'd like to know why you reverted my edit. So what is the consensus with Snooki's nationality in the lede?

According to her page, she only spent 6 months in Chile before being adopted by an American couple. She is most notable in USA and is still living there too. Aside from being born in Chile, she doesn't have any notoriety in the country. It seems better to just describe her as being an American in the lede. EDIT: Or Chilean-born American. Clear Looking Glass (talk) 23:18, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality is not American. She is Chilean. She was not born in the U.S. Amn110942 (talk) 16:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated photo

[edit]

Snooki has came a long way. I feel like she should have a more recent photo here instead of this old one. 2601:41:4382:E0:55DE:F8F7:86EB:40CE (talk) 10:33, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Snooki&oldid=1226274500"