This redirect 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
This redirect 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
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Do we really need to creat new pages for characters that have only appeared in one episode?? Ain't it better to wait until there really is something to write about them? Otherwise we tend to have loads of articles with very little information, if the character turn out to be a minor one (as was the case with Detective Ridley).
Far better, imo, to add the characters to List of Desperate Housewives characters - when they have appeared in two episodes ofcourse - and then create a specific page when there is enough information about the character. Pjär8019:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
I think it's OK to add characters who've appeared once and we know they'll appear again. Rick is on the guest starring list for the next few episodes and most of us know what's in store for Rick in the future. If they've appeared only once, I agree they shouldn't be added, but if we know that they will appear again, then I think it's OK. Cheater190800:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Hmm, good point. I think a good solution would be to only give characters their own article if they're series regulars, because their articles tend to be more extensive. I also think that we should give characters their own article if their the immdeiate family of a main character, because their articles are extensive too. For example, Kayla isn't a series regular, but she is Lynette's immediate family. What do you think? Cheater190823:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yeah - regulars clearly deserve own articles. As of immediate family members, I'm not sure that I think that qualifies for seperate articles (take Penny Scavo for instance). Still - most of the characters who have their own articles as of today, have it for a reason - namely that there is enough details to be said about them. My point however is that there is no way one could know wheater or not there will be enough to say about them until they have been on the show long enough. The number of episodes that a character has appeared/will appear in doesn't necessary mean anything (take Ida Greenberg for example - she has been in 18 episodes - more than any other non-main character, and only recently got her own article.) Pjär8023:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply