Talk:Jo Harvelle

Jo Harvelle has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 23, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

Plot vs. Biography[edit]

Hi, Ophois! I was wondering why we're calling that section "Plot" vs. "Biography" (or using some other section title). Is it because Jo Harvelle is a fictional character? Or is there some WP policy or rule of thumb that covers something like this? Thanks! • CinchBug • 11:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple reasons. First, it is a fictional character. Second, the section covers only the plot-related elements of the character; it does not cover her life from birth to death. Also, this is the format of all the Supernatural articles. Ω phois 18:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I see--that does make sense. I actually hadn't considered the fact that the section doesn't cover the entirety of her (fictional) life. I still wonder if there may be a better title than "Plot" that we can use throughout all of the Supernatural articles, but "Plot" is not bad and I agree that it's much better than "Biography". Thanks for the clarification and for all of your work on everything related to Supernatural on WP. I appreciate it! • CinchBug • 23:00, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Situation needed[edit]

I am the one that asked for that, but I later realised that in the 'Reception' section, all sorts of citations are used. So as far as I'm concerned, the 'situation needed' can be removed again, however, would it be a good idea to link to the 'reception' section, or use at least one source from that part in the introduction also? I really reckon it couldn't hurt, since Kripke is quoted, and the opinion of fans is used (usually two things that many Wikipedians like to see sourced, for they may otherwise create an allergic reaction :P). Robster1983 (talk) 08:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS I've added the 'citation needed' template being an anonymous user.Robster1983 (talk) 08:47, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The lead doesn't need to be sourced if it is repeating information sourced within the article itself. Ω phois 15:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thnx for your respons! I believe you right away. Also: I LOVE the Supernatural TV-series, and people like you keep it alive on this wiki! By all means: keep these artciles @ a good quality, as U already tried/did! Best regards, Robster1983 (talk) 23:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC

Add to Reception?[edit]

It looks like that the critical reaction to Jo's later appearances (in Season 5, particularly her death) have already been covered pretty well, but I was wondering if we should also add fan reaction? I ask because as of now it sounds like she remains disliked by the majority of the fan-base, but in Season 5 she actually became one of the most popular female characters, which is pretty note-worthy.--68.202.251.151 (talk) 09:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should definitely be added if possible, but the problem is finding reliable sources that cover it. Ω phois 18:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jo Harvelle. 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 https://web.archive.org/20071003163017/http://www.ifmagazine.com/review.asp?article=1622 to http://www.ifmagazine.com/review.asp?article=1622

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:48, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jo Harvelle. 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/20090818155948/http://www.tvguide.com/episode-recaps/Supernatural/November-2-2006-7496.aspx to http://www.tvguide.com/episode-recaps/Supernatural/November-2-2006-7496.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting[edit]

An Israeli actress but the Hebrew article was deleted. הראש (talk) 12:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]