Talk:Jennifer (given name)

Anthroponymy High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names 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.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cornwall Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:

Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

20th century?

Why does it say on the very first line that the name only came into English in the 20th century? Source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.217.23.77 (talk) 11:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

People named Jennifer?

WP:MOSDAB says: "In most cases, do not list names of which Title [Jennifer, in this case] is a part, unless the persons are very frequently referred to simply by their first or last name (e.g. Galileo, Shakespeare)." I think this article (and several others) can be shortened greatly. -- JHunterJ 20:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree. I think people are quite capable of searching for Jennifers with a search engine. ACW 04:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I suspect the history on the given name should be left here and the rest moved to a new article Jennifer (disambiguation); maybe later. I'm going to work (slowly) through Category:Given names and make similar cuts. Bob is already done. Help is welcomed. -- JHunterJ 14:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have to love people like JHunterJ, who think they can automatically change numerous wiki pages made by hundreds of posters because "they feel it is better." However, dozens of other posters have made the pages what they are. Now you completely eliminate their work. YOU ARE RUINING THEIR WORK!!! Why do you insist on being such a sad person? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.255.75.225 (talk • contribs) 17:00, 28 August 2006.

There is some discussion going on right now on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)/Archive 25#Hndis needs its own Manual. The things like the "list of people named Jennifer" does not appear to be encyclopedic, according to the Wikipedia guidelines (not because I feel it is better), and the guidelines grow out of these discussions. Please voice your concerns and ideas there as well. In the meantime, perhaps the previous list could be restored to a new article, List of people named Jennifer, if you still feel it is a useful list. -- JHunterJ 21:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important to add, for the benefit of the anonymous editor above, that nobody's work is being "ruined". Every version of every article that has ever been on Wikipedia is archived. It would be the work of thirty seconds to restore the precious list of a hundred and seventeen Jennifers. You, the anonymous editor, could have done that, although to your credit you didn't, and came here to discuss it first. Please, sir or madam, assume (at least at first) that we are all people of good will, that we want Wikipedia to be the best possible resource, and that nobody wants to ruin anything. Nothing is irreversible. ACW 23:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved in a different way in Nov 2007, by making Jennifer the disambiguation page and moving the article about the name, including list of Jennifers, to Jennifer (given name). - Fayenatic (talk) 17:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One link per line?

JHunterJ, can you explain the 'one link per line' policy? Where is it described, and what's the rationale? Thanks. ACW 02:14, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's described in WP:MOSDAB#Individual entries: "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link. Including more than one link can confuse the reader; including no links at all makes the entry useless for further navigation." -- JHunterJ 10:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Thanks. ACW 20:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jennifers

I think the list of Jennifers should be moved to the dab page. Almost anyone who is familiar with wiki, will realize this is a very common name and will first go to the dab page to find the Jennifer they are looking for. --soum (0_o) 11:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, not to the dab page; the list of Jennifers are not pages the would otherwise have the same title (an encyclopedia article about Jennifer Aniston was never in any danger of being entitled simply "Jennifer". If not here, List of people named Jennifer or removed altogether should be the options. -- JHunterJ 21:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That Proto-Celtic etymology

I am not sure what the basis for Proto-Celtic *vindo-siabraid "white phantom" is, but the siabraid part does not look very Proto-Celtic. (Note: síabraid is, in fact, an Old Irish word, not Proto-Celtic!) The Proto-Celtic lexicon collated by the University of Wales [1] gives this form as *windo-seibaro- (?) "white ghost". Also, the link to Ishara for siabraid, without further explanation, looks somewhat dubious. Pasquale 15:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is, actually (dubious, that is, I just exited a thumb-wrestling match with the author--or at least zealous fan of that pie-out-of-left field definition/explanation).

I cannot cite sources, but for DECADES I have ALWAYS seen--regardless of the source material this:

1.) Jennifer is of Welsh origin (I have always ONLY seen "Welsh" and "Origin" TOGETHER. Today was my FIRST time EVER reading "Cornish"). 2.) Jennifer comes from "Gwenyfar," which itself has MANY spellings, and further nomenclature descendents and variants 3.) Jennifer has ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS meant "white wave." I only found out after years that "white wave" was a reference to the "white waves" of the ocean--the breaking tides, the incoming tides, etc.

NEVER, NEVER, EVER have I EVER heard, nor read in ANY reputable, OR dubious source--whether from physical books from libraries, or bookstores, or even off of the *gasps* pre-Wikipedia Internet--whoa--ANY MENTION or even a mere HINT of "white ghost," "white enchantress," "white phantom," "et cetera, et cetera, et cetera (that there was a shout-out to Yul "Oh So Fine" Brenner...but moving on)."

The gentleman (I assume his name was spelled Drmies--can't remember the spelling) that reverted my changes on MORE than one occasion only seconds after I'd changed them only provided a source from ONE lady's book. He snapped a bit on my sources and called them "dubious" because I could not *gasps* provide a source--WHICH--had he read my comments on my changes (my bad, he did, he actually snapped on my baby names book reference--hmm...a book on the origins of names...how stupid on me...but MOOOOVING on again)--he would have seen I'd already said I didn't know how to cite books that I'd read decades prior whose names and authors I'd long forgotten, and couldn't remember every website from the 1990's, etc. I make this sound WAY meaner than it actually occurred as, because I personally DID enjoy chatting back and forth with him (or her?) but then I suppose s/he became bored, or moved on to something else to do, as I was supposed to do as well, however many minutes ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Pasquale, if you're still around after all these years, the article has been improved with some references. The above IP editor hasn't read any books to verify the "white enchantress", but that's not my problem; she can't cite anything for "wave" either. Anyway, I added a reference on the "white" etymology. Drmies (talk) 13:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, Drmies, I see. It does look cleaner now. However, I would use a W- rather than U- at the beginning of the Proto-Celtic form, as is customary. There is further discussion of the etymology under Ishara, which makes it clear that the Indo-European etymology of the theonym is far from certain. Pasquale (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, thanks for weighing in, Pasquale--please edit as you see fit. As an Anglo-Saxonist I am professionally forbidden from touching the matter. Drmies (talk) 20:47, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Variations

Does anyone have a reliable source for variations? Here is a list that was deleted earlier for lack of evidence. - Fayenatic (talk) 18:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of currently listed variations (or "Name variants" as they are called now). Ukrainian language uses Cyrillic alphabet, so name "Genowefa" would be written as "Геновефа". However, "Genowefa" is a valid Polish name, related to French "Geneviève". On a related note, there are no references in this article that show that "Geneviève" or names derived from it are related to or considered variants of "Jennifer" or "Guinevere".

Also, Russian name "Евгения" is equivalent of "Eugenia", and completely unrelated to "Jennifer". SadovnikovSS (talk) 10:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of popular Jennifers

Kickstart70, sorry to revert. I didn't think you would come back (many people on the name articles just come for one edit and leave). I take it that it is your opinion that the name articles shouldn't have any list of popular people with that first name since the list would be too long and it would be difficult to determine who should be on and who should be excluded. Is that correct? On another note, I'm glad to see you are taking an interest in the name articles (they need a lot of help). Perhaps you would be interested in joining the wikiproject dedicated to name article,i.e., Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy. In fact we are having a similar discussion over there if you would like to come over and discuss. Remember (talk) 14:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've added my view to that page. --Kickstart70-T-C 02:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also popular for Hispanics?

Is the name also popular for Hispanic females?

I've seen Mexican and Mexican-American girls' non-Spanish names like Jessica and Jennifer. Besides the names "Maria" and "Guadalupe," Mexicans and Latinos name their girls non-Spanish like Jessica, Jennifer, Amanda and Brittany. But only boys like to name it the Mexican way (e.g Jose, Juan)

How come some Hispanics name their female babies in English? but not boys? I've seen some Mexican women name "Jessica" and "Jennifer". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.24.17.210 (talk) 20:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was a cool comment! I can only guess it possibly (no clue though) could be because boys are more often named after granddads, or great granddads, who would have had the traditional names more likely. It may just be more rare for girls to be named after those they've descended from, and have names chosen more on whim or fancy by their parents. But I know that that's not even a general rule--I myself had at least ONE of my names originate from a great auntie, and I met a young lady a few years back with the same old/uncommon name as me who had also been named that same name after a great aunt of hers (we thought we might be related and so we started asking each other names of people in our families and origin locations, etc).

Cool comment though, I'd never noticed it until you pointed that out. Thanks!

Removed notable Jennifers

Rather than revert, please discuss here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anthroponymy/Archive_6#Again_with_the_popularity_contests.... We need to reach a proper consensus, and I will abide by that. Until that, however, I will continue to remove this section. --Kickstart70-T-C 03:09, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We do not maintain lists or people with frequently-used names. See e.g. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people named Jacob. – Fayenatic London 08:38, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citation needed for LACK of evidence??

In the first paragraph, the last sentence reads: "Despite the name's similarity to the Old English words jenefer, genefer and jinifer, which were all variants of Juniper and used to describe the juniper tree, there is no evidence that it was derived from these.^{[citation needed]}"

Since when is citation required for a lack of evidence? This is patently absurd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.118.4.1 (talk) 12:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it's not. For example, there is also no evidence that "Jennifer" is derived from "Jack", but that's trivial. If it's to be included, it needs to be verified; since the similarity with Juniper can be deemed reasonable, I see no grounds for removing it, but it needs a citation. Drmies (talk) 13:45, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the citation given (northumberland words) does not include anything supporting this claim. At best it can be said to not include anything contradicting the claim, a point which could also be made about Moby Dick or a telephone book. -Wormcast (talk) 13:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No Jennifers in Russia

Jenya (Женя) is a shortened form of both Eugene (Евгений) and it's female form (Евгения)/ Check your sources and edit! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.165.149.193 (talk) 14:36, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Czech Jenůfa

Why the link in other-language names list leads to opera of Leoš Janáček? Shouldn't it lead to page of that name? (which doesn't exist in this case) TH 21:40, 4 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.175.143.235 (talk)