Talk:Jamie Lynn Spears

Part of this talk page was moved to Wikipedia:Oh, no! More bad jokes and other deleted nonsense. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 10:23, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Name of article

I moved Jamie Spears to Jamie Lynn Spears, as it seems that is the name she is going to be marketed under, at least for now. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 09:53, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

And further confirming that, we have 10,200 Google hits for "Jamie Spears" as opposed to 66,000 Google hits for "Jamie Lynn Spears". —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 09:54, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

Somebody added what purports to be Jamie Lynn's AOL screen name, but it turned up no Google hits, so I removed it. Not sure that kind of thing should be in an article, anyway. But if someone wants to add it back, feel free. Everyking 20:58, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Umm...

This page needs serious attention, it looks as though somebody doesn't like Jamie Lynn and went through bad-mouthing her the whole article. I don't know how to do tags, but I think this one needs one. Vash The Stampede 02:14, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Great work on the edits, but that big about Don Swayze and Chris Penn is just another (albeit funnier) joke--right? --Mister Tattle 05:43, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jamie Lynn cant sing she is just trying to be like her sister but that will never happen jamie lynn spears does not have a boyfriend because newsweek intrviewed jamie lynn spears they ask her if she had any boyfriend jamie spears said no knid of haing out jamie lynn spears said i have good close friend but nothing serious

Wasn't Jamie Lynn Spears born in 1991?

According to her official web site (http://www.jamielynnspears.com/), she was born in April 4, 1992. However, imdb (http://imdb.com/name/nm1086604/) says 1991. I've been going by her official web site. But now, I don't know, and won't revert anybody who changes it. But if it's changed, please cite a new and better source. --rob 06:37, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Interestingly, I checked the bio on Jamie Lynn's official site today and it now states she's 14 years old. It goes on to state she'll be in the 9th grade this fall. Perhaps there was a typo.

Yep, you're right. I stand corrected. She is 14, and obviously born in 1991, not 1992, as her own site said previously. It is now fixed. --rob 10:04, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it was a typo. Fans have known her birthday was April 4, 1991 since she was about 10. Stephe1987 21:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

Can anyone cite this: "Spears caused some controversy in 2004 when she said that exercise guru Richard Simmons was a 'slimeball.' Many in the press said that Spears had lost her way and that her comments were completely unwarranted." I certainly couldn't confirm it anywhere else on the net. Mad Jack O'Lantern 17:04, 5 May 2006 (UTC) jamie lynn spears is not dating casy because read this If you don't mind me asking, what's your own dating life like right now? Any boyfriend? No, kind of hanging out. I have good, close friends, but nothing serious.

5:25 AM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment - Edit - Remove see jamie lynn spears does not have a boyfriend

"Gunged"?

"While on All That she also did many On-Air Dare skits(a nickelodeon version of fear factor) where she was gunged with 10,000 raw eggs, had to drink human sweat, and eat blue cheese dressing as well as other disgusting acts."

Uh.... is this kind of pedo fetish baiting really encyclopedic? especially when there is no mention of her other performances on the show? 72.155.156.92 14:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

What's so disgusting about blue cheese dressing? Geriguiaguiatugo 03:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It's made with mold. "Ewie!" It's probably more disgusting to kids than adults, and it was on a kid show. Bellpepper 10:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Birthday, again

I'm reposting this from a conversation I had with User talk:T3hrealadamd. Apparently there's still a typo on the official site, only noticeable in a popup window. I'm assuming that the popup window is a mistake, and the April 4, 1991 date is correct. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 03:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

You said the official web site says 1992...can you show me where you saw that? IMDB gives a date of April 4 1991. The official web site says she's 15 years old. TV.com says she's 15 years old. Based on all of those references, I have reverted it back to April 4 1991. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 19:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

By all means, I mean not to vandalize. Here's a link to a screenshot from that page: http://h.xerol.org/i/JLSbio.jpg If you hover over the top left picture on the Bio page, that pops up. I was just assuming the main page would have more correct info than anywhere else, and figured whoever typed it maybe made a typo and hit a 1 instead of a 2. But if that's been the concensus, then by all means revert my changes. Thanks. --T3hrealadamd ^(talk) 20:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate you taking the time to post that screen shot and the instructions. I didn't see that popup the first time I looked at the site. Very strange, but I still think that the popup is a typo. The text right under it says she's 15; IMDB gives the April 4, 1991 date, and I just checked the New York Times archive. On January 9, 2005, they gave her age as 13. On August 7, 2005, they gave her age as 14. And (as far as I can tell), every fan site I checked with Google gave the April 4, 2001 date. But let's post this on the Talk:Jamie Lynn Spears to see if anyone else can suggest another way to confirm the date. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 03:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree that 1992 was just a typo, and 1991 must be correct. Since we're lacking a truly reliable source (imdb and fan sites aren't reliable), if anybody seriously disputes 1991, I think they're entitled to remove the birthdate altogether, based on verifiability policy (e.g. have no birthdate). But, as said, I suggest leaving it at 1991. --Rob 00:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think it is best to get consistency in the page by getting the birth dates in the infobox and in the introduction to be the same. I shall edit the page and make the birth date in the introduction page as the 1991 date. --Shashi 05:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Top cheerleader

Can anyone tell me what makes her a "top" cheerleader as opposed to just a cheerleader? Binabik80 05:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Good question. A quick google search didn't provide any justification for "top cheerleader" (award-winning), so I removed the word "top" and added a link. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 06:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Needs Expanding

i went on her site and there was a huge biography of her there, but the article here is barely half a page long, i think someone should go and add some stuff to it because its pretty short, and its a little disheartening when someone like Jamie Lynn Spears has a half page article.

I'll work on it right after I get home, I'm writing write it now to remember.(Trampton 20:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)).

Can we Please have a new pic?

The picture of Jamie Lynn in this article is fairly outdated and i think a more current picture should replace it. check Jamie-spears.com for pictures, they have lots.

That picture is going to be deleted soon anyway, unless someone provides copyright information. Mark Grant 17:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

uhh isnt all the stuff on wikipedia under some no copyright law thing? well w/e it needs a new pic so we will just have to get some copyright stuff i guess

Infoboxes for celebrities can only use free use (ie. non-copyrighted images) pictures. It's Wikipedia policy. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 03:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Now let's change this one. It is kinda blurry.

(Trampton 09:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)).

ok, not exactly "up-to-date" but i guess itll have to do, but i have a plan, all we have to do is go to Los Angeles, or Kentwood, take a picture of her, then put it on wikipedia! brilliant, isnt it?

Confused?

how can she live in los angeles but attend school in missippi at the same time? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Curefreak (talk • contribs) 05:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

magic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.78.59 (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Album.

Isn't she rcording an album? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.25.197.19 (talk) 17:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

Protected

Too many anons have been changing her birth year and adding in speculative "boyfriends". Therefore, no anons may now edit the article. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 17:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone find a source for the image?

A new user recently uploaded image:061219 spears hmed 4p h2.jpg for this article. Can someone come up with a source and, if necessary, a fair use rationale? Shalom ^Hello 01:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the Reference List?

In the code the Refernce List appears, but when I look at the actual article it's not there. What gives?Spitfire (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

You took out a > at the end of the reference with your second edit so that screwed it all up. Metros (talk) 04:31, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Image suggestion

Would it be fesable to add a picture to the Pregnancy section? I found this image but I don't know if I should put it in or not, I'd like your input. :) http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20071219/capt.14e950fad50044ab90d5922a22ace34b.people_jamie_lynn_spears_la201.jpg?y=300&x=275&q=80&n=1&sig=W9DLflF73B41rtHjmcNIWw--

Spitfire (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Not really, no. Covers of magazines can only be used to discuss the magazine or the cover image. So unless we were discussing that particular cover, then no it cannot be used. I see no reason it should be added to the pregnancy section as it would add nothing. Metros (talk) 05:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Still a stub?

This article has been stubbed for a long time, but there have been significant edits and additions just in the last 24 hours. Does it still qualify as a stub? Wakedream (talk) 06:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to Bedford for removing stub tag. Wakedream (talk) 19:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Who cares?

This article is quite non-notable. 64.178.175.154 (talk) 13:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. If there is a wikipedia article about this wikipedia article, it should be deleted...Youkai no unmei (talk) 14:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but she is notable. She has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. Plus she has a significant role in a notable television production -Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 14:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

If there was any doubt of notability before this pregnancy revelation, I would think she is now...not exactly a good thing. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 23:31, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

She is a star of a successful television show, not to mention the sister of one of the most written about people on the Internet. In my opinion these makes the younger Spears notable whether or not she's pregnant. But broad coverage of her pregnancy doesn't hurt her notability. Wakedream (talk) 17:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The "But now she won't be doing much because of the pregnancy." speculation is silly, without reference and should be removed. When a clear statement is issued or time has passed then something can be added concerning her activities. 128.227.48.93 (talk) 01:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Another factor for notability--the Wikipedia article about the TV show in which Spears stars, Zoey 101, is currently rated as being of High Importance. Wakedream (talk) 18:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

18 or 19

A online MSN page (CelebEdge, Dramarama) said that the father is 18, not 19![1]--Brown Shoes22 (talk) 04:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I know. I was watching FOX 10 news AZ and they said he's 18. I'm going to change it. Michael Houang (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Almost all sources say 19, especially the one concerning the statuatory rape charge. "CelebEdge" may not be the most reliable source, either. Possibly just misinformation. Zchris87v 04:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you would want to see this one. I was inclined to exclude the statutory rape debate out of the article but now I feel it is inevitable it will creep in. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kushal one (talk • contribs) 21:14, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Once things settle down (which could take weeks), if there was a statement which could infer there was a crime that passes the reliable source sniff test, THEN I'd add it. WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 19:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

It appears his age of 18 has been confirmed (both currently and at the time of Spears' impregnation), as it now appears in the article. Whether or not this could constitute a crime seems to depend on where it took place, but the topic has been the subject of numerous articles and commentaries. Wakedream (talk) 11:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

1988 or 1989

The Notable Names Database lists Aldridge's birth year as 1989 on Spears' page, but it may have been in error. If he was born in 1988, then it makes sense that one would confuse between 18 and 19, as he was 18 on Jamie Lynn's birthday. If he was born in 1989 he would have been 17. So 1988 is more reasonable. LittleMsP 23:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to mention this because of Wikipedia being all spazzed out.. servers too busy, loss of data, etc. Aldridge is 19 and born in 1988 - graduated high school last year in 2006, attended junior college for about a year, works as pipe layer in Baton Rouge. [3] LittleMsP 15:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

She's actually 16 in 2007 not 18 or 19. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supersweetkayla (talk • contribs) 14:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Baby's father is not confirmed

Let's step carefully when we're treading in potentially illegal waters. More than once, an editor has written than Casey Aldridge is the father of Spears' unborn offspring. I've removed or changed this because: 1) until there's a genetic test, no one (except possibly Jamie Lynn Spears) can know who the father is; 2) as any alleged sex act between Aldridge and Spears may have been illegal, we'd essentially be saying he's guilty of a crime before trial or even arrest. Note Wikipedia policy regarding living persons: "This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard." As of this edit, you can see this near the top of this page. Until we have a source verifying that Aldridge is the father, let's leave it as a possibility, not a certainty. I welcome comments below. Wakedream (talk) 07:29, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hold on, there are enough reputable sources (such as CNN) who have spoken on it. I agree that unsourced and poorly sourced information MUST be removed, though. Kushal^t 22:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Apparently the boyfriend is not the father

"Star magazine says today that Casey Aldridge is NOT the father of Jamie Lynn Spears baby, despite her claims, and in fact the real father is a producer on her show "Zoey 101". The producer/real dad is described as "much older" and he cannot come forward because it would be admitting to statutory rape and he would almost certainly face jail time." See here brob (talk) 09:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it was right! brob (talk) 12:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for posting this here instead of in the article itself. It gives a chance for comment about a controversial source. Star magazine features "celebrity news and gossip," as it proclaims on its website [4]. "Gossip" often means unsubstantiated rumors, making this a highly questionable source for Wikipedia. I think Wikipedia would be improved if more people posted such things on the talk page of an article first, as you have done. Wakedream (talk) 11:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

The allegation has now been posted on this article. Star magazine, as stated above, proclaims that it publishes gossip, and I'm not seeing a reference to this in the mainstream media, just a couple other gossip publications that are citing Star. Should this be used as a source? Wakedream (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

She says that that Casey dude is the father, unless there is very strong proof against this and BIG sources, wikipedia should not encourage gossip. I'm removing the "is now being alleged" thing, very very, weasely and it's definetely not encyclopedic. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 17:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I had thought about removing it myself, but wanted another opinion. And thanks for the free hug. :-) Wakedream (talk) 07:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I just want to second that. I came to this article after reading the news on IMDb.com and expected to have tons of information originating from unrealiable sources here, but you guys are doing a great job. Star Magazine is not a reliable source and as long as no rep of Spears or any other third party with an acceptable reputations claims that the Casey-dude is not the father, I strongly suggest to leave this piece of information out. Best regards, --Plumcouch ^Talk2Me 15:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll accept the compliment on behalf of all those who participated. :-) Wakedream (talk) 07:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

HA! She just got owned

Location of conception

I certainly do not want to start an edit war. However, I added that the location of conception is not verified, even though a reference to this had earlier been cut. Depending upon where it happened and the circumstances of how it happened, it could be regarded as legal, a misdemeanor or a felony. I believe that's important enough to warrant a line or two in the article. Wakedream (talk) 07:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Unverified claim

"whom she met through church.[6] [12]" but sources 6 and 12 do not support this statement! The AP Wire page doesn't say anything like it and the OK Mag only has it in two reader comments, which are in no way a reliable source. Why would the writer of this cite two such sources? It seems he's just assuming nobody would check them. You should do something about this and if it turns out to be an outright lie get the writer for it. 77.248.16.35 (talk) 11:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

i removed it since it was not surported by the citations. In the future feel free to remove things like this yourself.harlock_jds (talk) 12:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Age of the father

The father's age is 19, not 18. Just thought you oughtta know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.13.12.56 (talk) 01:06, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

The sources we have say the man that Jamie Lynn says is the father is 18, not 19. If you have a reliable source that states otherwise, by all means post it here. Wakedream (talk) 06:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Is Zoey 101 over????

Zoey 101 is not over of what I saw the day her new Zoey 101 movie got out on Nick. The whole story is she is in science class when she gets a note her parents are here and they ask her if she wants to go to London with them for her dads new job. The big deal is she never told Chase about and the really bad thing is Chase herd about it from other people and that really bugged him so Chase wanted to appologize because he didn't go to her goodbye fom PCA. So Quin gets a camera hooked up on Logan's TV and talks to her but what bugged Zoey was even if he was mad at her he didn't say goodbye. So then Michale wants to send his history report to his teacher but he can't because the button to talk to Zoey in London won't let him so Logan tells him to keep pressing send and by accident turns on the camera and when Chase walks in the room he addmits he loves Zoey and Zoey herd it all. And it all stops then but I don't know if it will be continued —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.223.194.250 (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, according to this article, you are going to get one last season.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 17:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Right on top of me, but according to the Zoey 101 article, it appears that a new episode is going to air on Nick, January 27 2008. Cheers NiMiTiZe _{Msg16:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)}

Crime is about the sex, not the impregnation

I wanted to say this here first in case someone knows something I don't. As far as I can tell, the criminal charges regarding the pregnancy are centered on if her boyfriend committed statutory rape, which is about the sex act itself, not "the impregnation" which, theoretically, is not a crime in and of itself.

From the article: "However, it is not known where conception occurred. Depending on the location, the impregnation might or might not have been illegal."

I don't think this is correct because the impregnation is not the crime here: the sex act is. The only reason that the pregnancy matters it that it is proof (excluding the rather unlikely non-sex induced pregnancy scenario) that there was a potentially illegal sex act and even the source cited for that section (Jonathan Turley (21 December 2007). Spears Pregnancy May Result in Television Special Rather than Criminal Charges) doesn't suggest it is the pregnancy that is a criminal matter but rather the sex act.

Also, the location of the conception does not matter, only the location of the sex act (it is possible for them not to be the same.)

I would recommend, then, that the above section be changed to read:

However, it is not known where the sex act which resulted in the pregnancy took place. Depending on the jurisdiction, the act may or may not have been illegal.

If you know something which contradicts what I have said, or if you have a better replacement, please say so. If not, I will make the change in a day or two. Oniamien (talk) 20:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree, I changed impregnation to intercourse. Nil Einne (talk) 18:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Error on article

The age of the boyfriend is wrong; he is not 19 now he is 18; he will be 19 on april.

I've already changed this Nil Einne (talk) 18:43, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Casey Aldridge

Uhh why does Casey Aldridge redirect to this article... they aren't the same person... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.125.46 (talk) 19:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

He has no notability of his own; he's just known as her boyfriend. So it redirects here since it's the only coverage he'll have on Wikipedia. Metros (talk) 19:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I WANT TO KNOW WHY EVERYTIME I TYPE SOMETHING IT GETS DELETED, FIX IT, YOU MEANIES! Azrael (talk) 13:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Jamie Lynn in hiding

It says that Jamie Lynn is being kept in her house for her own sake. It also says in the article that Jamie Lynn is in denial about the pregnancy. But the source for that (and others I know of on the same topic) specifically state that LYNNE Spears is in denial about the pregnancy, not Jamie Lynn. I think that needs to be fixed.