Talk:Jena Malone

message: If Jena was born in Lake Tahoe (as it is mentioned in the article), she she will be drowned in a few seconds, because Lake Tahoe is a sea. So, maybe she's born in South Lake Tahoe, Tahoe City or another town aside the sea. If this isn't true she could have been born in Sparks, Nevada - that's what many websites say. Maybe she currently lives in South Lake Tahoe or Tahoe City or in some place at Lake Tahoe. So what's really true about this fact? --84.138.70.214 between 07:07 and 08:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this is somewhat misleading because Lake Tahoe indeed appears to be a lake not a city or town, though at the bottom of the same article it says that Lake Tahoe is one of the major regions of Nevada (see Template:Nevada). However, though most of the external sources simply repeat that she was born in Lake Tahoe, Nevada, this article in the Notable Names Database states that she was born in Sparks, Nevada. The same article suggests that during her childhood she had lived in 27 different places "including their car, and a trailer park on the outskirts of Lake Tahoe". I think it would be more appropriate either to mention the region of Lake Tahoe or Sparks as her birthplace. Nevertheless, I have no idea where she lives now. :) --Jūzeris | Talk 16:05, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of birth 

message: I've had this article tagged as unreferenced since May 22.  My attempts at keeping this article tagged as such have been unsuccessful thus far due to multiple reversions by an editor who is unwilling to discuss her reversions any further.  However, instead of engaging in an edit war, I've decided to add some inline citations to my previously tagged version of this article.  I am hoping this will jump start the process of finding appropriate references and adding them here.  If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. -- backburner001 17:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. It's always good to have articles referenced, but not to the extent of defacing them for an indefinite period when they aren't disputed. Rebecca 05:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that tagging unreferenced statements qualifies as defacing articles.  However, it appears in the current revision that you are willing to let specific statements remain tagged, which I think is a step in the right direction.  -- backburner001 14:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the grounds that you actually intend to cite them in the foreseeable future. Rebecca 04:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the grounds that any Wikipedia editor intends to cite them.  The responsibility to cite these statements does not only lie with me.  It lies with you and other editors too.  The templates I used to tag statements with in this article exist to alert other editors to citation problems.  Removing these tags only impedes our ability to improve articles that do not conform to WP:CITE. -- backburner001 14:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Can you suggest any alternate sources? Furthermore, can you elaborate on why IMDB is not reliable?  (Note: I'm do not necessarily disagree with you on IMDB's reliability; I'd just like to discuss it in further detail.) -- backburner001 18:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I simply can not even begin citing examples of incorrect IMDB information. The IMDB is not reliable simply because it is, essentially, Wikipedia. It's just harder to delete wrong info from there then it is here. The IMDB trivia or bios are submitted by fans or by who-knows-what. If we're lucky, it's correct. If we're not, it isn't and came from the imagination of the submitter. Same thing for film credits for upcoming movies (see a recent example in Halloween (2007 film) (the "Rumored storylines and castings" section - two paragraphs in). Every single one of these trivia sites - IMDB, NNDB, TVtom are second-hand, info-gathering sources, just like Wikipedia. And unless they cite where they got their info from - which they don't - they simply aren't reliable. Good sources for actors, at least, are interviews/in-depth profiles - anywhere where the subject was personally involved in. I'm going to put this page on my "to do" list and cite it to reliable sources tomorrow or so. Mad Jack 07:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There, I couldn't help myself and sourced it now - hope that helps. I couldn't find a source for this, though: "In 2002, Malone began studying photography at a community college in northern California." According to this,, she was planning to do so... whether she ever did I am not sure. But yeah, those are the kinda sources that make Wikipedia look almost like a first-hand source, and definitely more reliable than the IMDB. :) Mad Jack 08:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Footnotes and references

message: I honestly cannot understand why my reference to Donnie Darko was deleted.  The person who deleted it made a smarmy comment about her prior nomination for a Golden Globe for a TV movie.  There is a fairly large difference between getting a Golden Globe nomination for work done as a supporting actress for a TV movie and starring as the romantic lead in a (relatively) big budget Hollywood movie (albeit one that did not make much money).  Indeed, the page _inaccurately_ says that her first starring role was in the 2004 film Saved!  But her first starring role was in Donnie Darko.  Three years earlier.
And no, playing "Young Ellie" in Contact would not qualify as a breakout role.  Nor was playing a minor role in a Showtime movie of the same nature.
Donnie Darko was
a) a romantic lead where she was the second most important character
b) a Hollywood release that played in cinemas
and IMHO
c) the highest visibility role that Jena Malone has played in her career.  
With all due respect to Saved!, Donnie Darko is in fairly common rotation on the various cable movie channels, and I've never seen Saved! shown once.  (Nor Bastard Out of Carolina for that matter).  
The only two Jena Malone films that get regular play are Donnie Darko and The Ruins.  
I'm resubmitting with language emphasizing the high visibility of the role. 
I honestly cannot understand how the Donnie Darko reference was deleted while the relatively unimportant role of Lydia Bennett in Pride and Prejudice was left in.  Clearly the person who made the edit has not seen Donnie Darko.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickDesper (talk • contribs) 04:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donnie Darko 

message: As Cresix has reverted the edit I unlinked GED with and wrote it out, I`d like to ask if the abbreviation could not also be unlinked, before I simply do that. I, personally, do not yet know the United States as well as to be able to decide how well this abbreviation is known throughout the country, and so on. Indeed, when I visited the country, in 1995, involuntarily, it was striking to me how much there was talked about such an examination. My Canadian relatives even showed me a strong paperback volume with mathematical formula which they told me about was the US equivalent to what I had just passed, in Germany, myself. I did not understand anything of those formula, but it was striking how often my cousin, and also others, began talking about that subject, again and again. It nearly looked as if they expected me to do that examination, myself. After all, also this my experience endorses my impression that the thing was quite well known in the US, and that is also what You are talking about, here, Yourself. So, why should we not unlink even the abbreviation - although it is only an abbreviation? Typing in "ged" into the English Wikipedia`s search field, one fairly swiftly finds out about what is meant. And it is always better if in an article there are only linked to the things which specifically refer to the article`s catchword, isn`t it? That brings about a much more calm overall atmosphere.
Jena Malone seems to be a special case regarding such matters, because she has already very early begun working as an actress and then, even, won legal emancipation from her mother, earlier than usual - anyway, an interesting case. Also the fact that Malone has moved unusually often in her childhood and that, often, over considerable distances draws the attention to such questions of how one might organize one`s education resp. that of one`s children, in the US. All this could indeed - falsely - be counted a reason to link to the General Educational Development. But, from a really systematic point of view, even this could not suffice.
Such a certificate, moreover, remains something dry and unromantic and, thus, forms a contradiction to the subject of this article and its nature. For me, the result is altogether that the General Educational Development, be it abbreviated or not, should rather not be linked, here. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 22:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Hans. The only reason I reverted your good faith edit and restored "GED" is because that abbreviation is very widely used in the United States. It's quite common to hear, "He didn't finish high school but got his GED." I'm not sure how many people understand exactly what it stands for, just the general idea of what it means. Now, you raise another completely different issue that I didn't understand from your edit summary, if I understand you correctly now: Should "GED" be linked to General Educational Development. I don't feel strongly one way or the other, but I would like to hear other opinions. If others agree with you, that's fine with me. But we must include the acronym GED (linked or unlinked) if we mention her education, because she did not graduate from high school in the usual way, and I'm sure a lot of readers don't realize that "General Educational Development" refers to "GED". Thanks for explaining more fully. Cresix (talk) 23:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: GED could, for example, reasonably be linked to, here, if it had been changed or been let as it was due to the Jena Malone case, by the legislative forces, and so on, or if Mrs. Malone had really experienced some troubles around it which directly refer to it. The GED is of bigger interest, here, than it might be in many other articles about people who have passed it, but the basic requirements for it to be linked are not yet given, here. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 15:13, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a problem with unlinking it, as long as we include "GED" in her educational information. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 16:01, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to [[General Educational Development]] 

message: Obviously her birth was not the result of conception between two lesbian lovers.  So does anyone know who her father is and what the deal is about him?  Won legal emancipation from her mother, who is now barred from interfering with Jena's career and earnings in January 2000.  Filed suit against mother Debbie, charging mismanagement of her earnings, failure to pay taxes.  But where is mention of her father?  One article says that she was the product of a one night stand and only saw her father once at age 4.   Albert14nx05y (talk) 09:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Which article is that? Is it a reliable source? For An Angel (talk) 16:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Try this http://www.biography.com/people/jena-malone-17176434  Albert14nx05y (talk) 03:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent, that site appears to be a reliable secondary source with a reputation for fact checking and editorial oversight. I can accept facts cited to this page. Now find more pages and sites like this and you will have well-sourced articles. Elizium23 (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who's her daddy? 

message: Please do not add Catching Fire to the filmography yet, because  it is not yet in production. The current status is that Malone is said to be in talks with the producers for the role of Johanna Mason. Nothing is definite yet - so please observe WP:CRYSTAL. When the announcement comes that she has signed on to the picture, the story can be included in the prose section about her career. Catching Fire can be added to the filmography only when principal photography has commenced. It will assuredly be before the end of 2012. Thank you for your contributions. Elizium23 (talk) 12:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catching Fire 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jena Malone. 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/20060909051904/http://www.ym.com/jsp/stars/ontheverge/index.jsp to http://www.ym.com/jsp/stars/ontheverge/index.jsp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070219024744/http://pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/41227/Actress_Jena_Malone_Records_Social_Registry_7 to http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/41227/Actress_Jena_Malone_Records_Social_Registry_7
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: the link for her role in the film Cheaters is incorrect, it points to a TV show. The correct link should be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheaters_(film) as found in Jeff Daniels' page, he is also in the movie.  12.15.136.26 (talk) 02:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheaters