Talk:Jello (disambiguation)

comments
Just curious, since all of these definitions come from the term Jell-O, should the default for for "jello" go to the Jell-O page and this be renamed to Jello (disambiguation) and be linked as "see also:"? --Knulclunk (talk) 14:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Jello: A Way Of Describing How You Feel - Physically and/or Emotionally
Jello sometimes can be used as a metaphor in referencing a physical or emotional sense or state of being. For example, "my girlfriend makes me feel like Jello when I think of or am around her." Or in the physical sense, "my legs feel like Jello" - caused by either a workout, long walk or the result of an intense emotional reaction or state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecogalaxy (talk • contribs) 21:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Ecogalaxy (talk) 22:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 11:22, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Jello → Jello (disambiguation) – Jell-O is the primary topic p  b  p  18:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose -Jello is a generic term, while Jell-O is a brand name.
 * Conditional Oppose the primary topic is Gelatin dessert. If this is moved, then it should redirect to Gelatin dessert. -- 70.49.127.65 (talk) 04:30, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that the mark has become genericized and the primary meaning of this term, in this day and age, is Gelatin dessert, of which the brand-name Jell-O is just a type. Since the genus is discussed on the page of the species, I see no harm in moving the page as proposed and redirecting the current title to Gelatin dessert with the appropriate hatnote. bd2412  T 17:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support – this seems to be a proposal based to bump a dab page from the primary namespace because a primary topic exists per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, presumably with a redirect to that page, since "jello" is an alternate name in form. The issue is then what, if any, is the primary topic.  Looking at some data, rather than assertions, stats.grok.se page views show:
 * Jello has been viewed 6208 times in the last 90 days.
 * Jell-O has been viewed 70148 times in the last 90 days.
 * Gelatin dessert has been viewed 30642 times in the last 90 days.
 * Jello Shoecompany has been viewed 490 times in the last 90 days.
 * I'd say that there is a primary topic, and it appears to be the brand name. ENeville (talk) 18:21, 2 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. Let us not throw around legal terminology carelessly.  Trademark genericization is an actual legal determination, one which has not been found in this case.  Some people may use it generically, but the trademark is still a trademark, just as Xerox and Kleenex are.  In any case, "jello" is clearly the brand name, simply rendered differently, and I see no reason to treat the two renderings differently.  Powers T 22:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I assure you, my friend, I never throw around legal terminology carelessly. One need not wait for a court to deem a mark genericized in order to assert that it has become genericized; otherwise even long-abandoned marks would be entitled to the presumption of validity. For example, there was never a court ruling to determine that escalator had become genericized, but the absence of a legal determination does not mean that it is still a valid mark. On the other hand, on further reflection I am also willing to support a redirect to Jell-O, since the word "jello" is derived from the name of the brand. Cheers! bd2412  T 13:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

claim of "genericized"
I noticed that several IPs (most linking back to Kraft Foods) have been attempting to remove the mention "A genericized brand for gelatin desserts in general", and this removal gets reverted each time.

However, I think the IP is correct that the mention should be removed or at least rephrased. The claim of the word being a genericized brand is unsourced, and I can't locate verification for it. The only mention I can locate supporting this claim is in Gelatin dessert, where the claim is also unsourced and appears to be original research. There is no mention of it being genericized in the linked articles; and the reliable sources that I've checked thus far state that it's a proprietary name, or that it's a trade-marked brand of gelatin dessert - none are supporting the claim that it's genericized.

At best, it may be a colloquial term for gelatin, but not a genericized term. As such, I believe converting the mention to instead read "A colloquial term sometimes used to refer to gelatin desserts".

I'll go ahead and be bold and make this change. If reverted, please discuss here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)