Talk:List of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory characters

Candy?

In the willy wonka section it mentions that he is an owner of a "Candy" factory. This term is never used in the book, it is always reffered to as a chocolate factory. sillybillypiggy 17:11, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

That may be true, but Wonka produces a vast array of confections (everlasting gobstoppers, to name just one), so it would hardly be incorrect to describe it as a candy factory. PurpleChez (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

The "Everlasting Gobstoppers" and other candies seen during the tour are all projects he is working on. The only thing I recall being sold (i.e., produced in large quantities) in the book is chocolate bars. The title, after all, is "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". - SummerPhD (talk) 19:23, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

It’s also unusual to the British eye to see candy used where they would normally see sweet; the fact that the book title defines the type of factory as SummerPhD mentions, probably makes “candy factory” original research. Jock123 (talk) 10:35, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Arthur Slugworth

There's already a page for Arthur Slugworth that goes into some detail about his various incarnations in film. Either that should be merged into this article, or, since his transformations between adaptions were quite notable, limit this to a summary of his novel character, and indicate that for the movie adaptations, the reader should examine the main Arthur Slugworth page.

--Cosmocatalano (talk) 19:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Veruca

Is it worth noting that a veruca is a type of wart? Surely Dahl would have that in mind when he named the character. Of lesser importance, is it worth noting that a pop band took the name Veruca Salt? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.92.180.246 (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The first one is a definite yes. That is an interesting fact that is not entirely provable. (Just remember to write it in a way that suggests that it could be just a coincidence. Otherwise, it's a violation of WP:No original research). For the second one, I'd say no, unless you can provide a reliable source that confirms it 100%. Nick1372 (talk) 20:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

There is, most definitely, a fairly well-known pop band named "Veruca Salt." I'd say that's a significant "legacy" and should be noted. Wikipedia's disambiguation page for "veruca" and the page for the band "Veruca Salt" each report that the band is named after the character. PurpleChez (talk) 18:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

RE: Nick1372's response above. Your response is completely backwards. The first is a definite "no": "an interesting fact that is not entirely provable" is trivia and original research. It may not be added no matter how it's phrased, and advising someone to "write it in a way that suggests that it could be just a coincidence" is instructing them to use weasel words, which are usually indicative of unsubstantiated opinion. The WP article on the band Veruca Salt does indeed claim that the band is named after the character, but no source citation is offered, making it OR. If it becomes sourced in that article, it can absolutely be added to this one if there is a "legacy" or "pop culture" section. Otherwise, it's trivia; the source of the band name is amply described in the relevant article on the band and does not necessarily belong in this article, which already needs substantial rewriting to meet quality standards. 12.233.147.42 (talk) 23:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Chapter 14- "My dear Veruca! How do you do? What a pleasure this is! You do have an interesting name, don't you? I always thought that a veruca was a sort of wart that you got on the sole of your foot! But I must be wrong, mustn't I?"

Has anyone editing this page actually read Willy Wonka in the last 20 years? Several important characters are missing. There were five children (10 in one of the original storylines per the official Dahl site) who found tickets. Much is missing from this page. A good kid lit prof needs to get ahold of it and flesh it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.167.159.136 (talk) 15:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

The first graf in Veruca's section refers to squirrels in the 2005 film and the second graf states that the squirrels are replaced by geese in the 1971 film. Since the 1971 film most likely preceded the 2005 film, why wouldn't it read that the squirrels replaced the geese? Perhaps the grafs should be swapped or, more simply, the word "replaced" should be replaced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:0:ED97:D076:9ED4:29D:80E8 (talk) 13:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I just changed it to "In the earlier film it is not squirrels but geese that instead lay special golden chocolate-filled eggs for Easter." Hope that is acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:0:ED97:D076:9ED4:29D:80E8 (talk) 13:31, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm disputing the claim that Veruca is depicted in both films as upper class. Roy Kinnear played her father in the first film as upwardly mobile working class. He made himself wealthy by operating a number of sweat shops but retained an urban accent. Just because he is rich doesn't make him upper class. In any case, claiming that the character belongs to this or that class requires a reliable source or it's or. Canonblack (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Book vs. Films

I think it would be appropriate to differentiate between characther details taken from the original book and those coming out of one of the films. I'm thinking of Violet's being from Atlanta and her many trophies. PurpleChez (talk) 18:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

This page is being brigaded by reddit

/r/grandpajoehate is making weird edits to the Grandpa Joe section — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:4000:AA6:75DA:60E3:EDC5:97C8 (talk) 23:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2020

Change thee Salts to two salts. Only Veruca and her Father went the Chocolate Factory. 107.77.169.44 (talk) 03:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: The first part of the section describes what happens in the book. In the book, both of Veruca's parents go to the factory with her. It is mentioned later in that section that the films contradict the book and have only her father go with her. TJScalzo (talk) 07:48, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Unclear reference in Charlie Bucket character description

"His nationality is never explicitly stated, but in the 1971 film, he speaks with an American accent, and in the 2005 film, he speaks with an English accent," declares the description. "...In this version,... Charlie explains that the family needs the money now...." But which version is that, the 1971 film adaptation or the 2005? Mucketymuck (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

The 2005 one I believe. I don't recall him ever bringing up the need for money in the 1971 adaption. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 12:46, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

"Charlie bucket redirects here"

"Charlie Bucket" redirects here. For other uses, see Charlie Bucket (disambiguation).

should be added in the beginning of charlie bucket.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Freddie Highmore at GQ Men Year Awards 2021.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:43, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Vermicious Knids

These are also mentioned in James and the Giant Peach. 141.241.26.7 (talk) 18:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Demonstrably false statement

Late in the article, the unsourced statement appears, “When Nestlé created its interpretation of Wonka's world to sell chocolate bars under the name ‘Wonka’, they released a number of downloadable flash games…” This cannot be true. Nestle created the Wonka brand in 1974 in conjunction with the re-release of the 1971 film. Adobe Flash wouldn’t be invented for another 22 years. The statement requires clarification and a source citation. 2603:9001:4500:1C09:4D96:E28A:86CB:C6A7 (talk) 11:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC)