Talk:Bridget Parker

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera articles

Australia: Television Low‑importance

	Australia portal Bridget Parker is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

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

Bridget Parker 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
July 19, 2009	Articles for deletion	Kept
August 3, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

better known as Parker?

I appreciate the character has married, but Wikipedia:NAME may apply, probably better known (for the minute, though if she also dies, this may change) as Parker, not Napier? Any thoughts? There are other precedents, e.g. Gwen Cooper is still there. despite also marrying? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.213.10 (talk) 20:22, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tbh, I think the user above has a point. She was better known as Bridget Parker and she only married towards the end of her time on the show. Who's in favour of moving the page back to Parker? - JuneGloom07 Talk? 10:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would leave it as Bridget Napier. As far as I'm aware she did change her name when she married so she died as Bridget Napier - that's what her page should reflect, how long she was married for shouldn't matter, after all they were married some months before her death --5 albert square (talk) 23:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Been thinking about this for a while and just decided to look at the credits from a bunch of 2009 episodes. Bridget was never credited as a Napier following her marriage to Declan and her gravestone read Parker upon her death. So, the article shouldn't have been moved in the first place and should be moved back now, per WP:COMMONNAME. - JuneGloom Schmooze 21:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's her most memorable name and from after her death she was still refered to as Parker in come cases.RAIN..the..ONE ^HOTLINE 21:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another good way IMO is to look at Google trends, all hits go to Bridget Parker, non to Napier.. the same for lets say Donna Freedman over Brown.RAIN..the..ONE ^HOTLINE 21:55, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd now say that it should be re-named or moved to Bridget Parker. --5 albert square (talk) 22:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
In the Teen pregnancy section, "...further adding she wouldn't have liked to film the storyline" ---> "...further adding she would not have liked to film the storyline", per here. In the Departure section, "Mignon announced that her reason for leaving the show was so that she could return to studying an Arts degree at university", does the university have a name? In the 2007-2009 section, you don't need to add who Declan Napier and Susan Kennedy are played by since it's already noted at the Disability section.
Everything fixed. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Check.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
Reference 13 has a different url link path, so you might want to update that.
Done
Check.

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Not that much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for taking this on. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 23:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite welcome. Thank you to JuneGloom for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 14:40, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[1] - They say it feels like her pregnancy lasted forever.RAIN*the*ONE ^BAM 23:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[2] - Bridget shouldn't of tried to enjoy herself.Rain the 1 ^BAM 23:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Teen pregnancy storyline

See Talk:Declan Napier/Archives/2011/July#Teen pregnancy storyline. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bridget Parker. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:58, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Bridget Parker. 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:

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) 18:40, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]