Wikipedia talk:WikiProject EastEnders/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

EE Newsleter

Hi guys. I've been working on a newsleter for EE, tell me what you think of it and if you would be intrested. If you want to receive it just tell me on my talk page and i'll deleiver it to you every month, also I put in a EE award which i gave to Gungadin. MayhemMario 19:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Do we really need a newsletter? It's not like we don't all know what's going on... –anemoneprojectors– 10:03, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Well im going to send it round, just say if you dont want it next time. ;) MayhemMario 15:03, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

it should be opt-in, not opt-out. –anemoneprojectors– 13:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

List Images

The 2010 and 2011 characters lists just had all their images orphaned due to WP:NFLISTS. I got one thing to say: "NOOOOOOOOOOO!". Never mind, was bound to happen. GSorby - Talk! 20:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

About time! –anemoneprojectors– 10:04, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

joining the team:)

Hi guys my name is crazyfishsticks and I have been on this for a few weeks now and my main interest on this is soap operas:), I am a huge fan of EastEnders and i really think ye have done a great job with all The EastEnders articles, I have read a few them and I think they are interesting and well written, anyway i was just wondering if ye had room for 1 more on the wiki project EastEnders team:D, I really enjoy being on Wikipedia over the last few weeks and i realize i may not have done much on this yet but I promise if ye let me work with ye I will work regularly with ye on improving All aspects of Eastenders on Wikipedia, I hope that ye allow me to join it would be really appreciated:), hope to here from ye guys soon thank you:) Crazyfishsticks (talk) 23:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Brian, you're really not doing yourself any favours here. The longer you carry on sockpuppeting, the longer it will be until an admin is willing to unblock you. Frickative 00:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I should have guessed it was you. You had me fooled with the one helpful edit to Rae. You've just caused trouble the rest of the time.RaintheOne ^BAM 00:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

excuse me? who is brian? My name is Tim! Would someone like to explain to me what is going on here?:( Crazyfishsticks (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:EE members reviewing WP:EE GAs

This concerns me a little, is it not somewhat a conflict of interest? Also, Mario's reviewing Yusef but he made edits to the list entry, meaning part of the article is attributed to him and he shouldn't therefore be reviewing it. –anemoneprojectors– 10:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

100% agree and the fact he previously edited the list entry is a no-no.RaintheOne ^BAM 10:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Conflict of interest aside, Mario shouldn't be reviewing that one. Just because he doesn't appear in that page's history, his edits are still there. –anemoneprojectors– 10:31, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure in the past the good folks at WP:GAN have actively encouraged Project members to get more involved with reviewing articles within the scope of their Project. All I can find on the topic now though is from WP:RGA: "The review should not be influenced by beliefs about how the article could be made "perfect", by how the reviewer would have written the article, or by personal feelings about the article topic. (This is a particular consideration for articles within the scope of a WikiProject where the reviewer is an active member. Sometimes it is helpful for an article to have an expert reviewer, but on other occasions it is preferable that the reviewer is not too close to the topic.)" I think the ball is really in Mario's court, if he feels his previous contributions to the topic were insignificant, and he doesn't have a vested interest in seeing it promoted, then all to the good. Frickative 12:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I commented on this on Mario's talk page yesterday. I was a bit surprised to see GSorby nominate the article and then ask Mario to review it. It had been in the queue for a couple of minutes, whereas the article at the top of the list has been there for a couple of months. - JuneGloom Talk 13:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I failed it, so someone outside can review it, i hope im doing the right thing. MayhemMario 15:01, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure failing it was the right way to go about it, it should have just ended some other way. I don't know the procedure for this. –anemoneprojectors– 13:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

It's usual to request a second opinion, right?RaintheOne ^BAM 13:42, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Lola Pearce

Someone created this article but I reverted it due to lack of discussion. However, it looked quite extensive and had a fair bit of reception. What does everyone think? Should it be reverted to an article? –anemoneprojectors– 14:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Oh and if you all agree, feel free to do this when I'm not here as I only have an hour a day at the moment. –anemoneprojectors– 14:55, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry was me, i didn't realise that it had to be discussed before being created. Article is here in my sandbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:D4nnyw14/sandbox Thanks and sorry again D4nnyw14 (talk) 15:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

That's ok, generally we do like to discuss on here first. It is just based on the current list entry, split into sections and added reception, or did you change stuff about? I don't have time to check but I like to know these things :-) Reception is always the best thing to have, and you had a good number of sources, so it seems fine to me. –anemoneprojectors– 15:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I added in casting, reception, characterisation and creation. Creation was partially split from the list and storyline was completely split from the list. The intro to the character at the top was split from the list as well but the rest was me D4nnyw14 (talk) 15:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Well that's good, you've worked quite hard it seems. Do others support this being split off? –anemoneprojectors– 10:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

It seems a little early for her to have her own article, but I'm no deletionist and if there are enough references etc. then fine Stephenb (Talk) 11:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I kinda agree with Stephenb, it does seem a little early. - JuneGloom Talk 12:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough then i can leave it in my sandbox. Only a small point but Lola first appeared 24 days ago and 26 days after Eddie first appeared he had his own page so its not really that early compared to other characters. D4nnyw14 (talk) 12:24, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Kind of seems odd just to leave it in a sandbox just to wait till a specific amount of time lapses. If it's notable, it's notable so I dont have a problem with it being separated. But regardless, I think all the sourced content should be merged to the list if not separated. Great work D4nnyw14.GunGagdin^Moan 16:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Well I don't mind if D4nnyw14 wants to split it again. –anemoneprojectors– 13:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Im working on it a bit more and then i'll probably split it again if no one disagrees D4nnyw14 (talk) 13:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I've done one too. Look here. Anemone always said that Reception was the key :-) GSorby - Talk! 14:08, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

It is almost identical to mine and has the exact same sources D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I hope your not accusing me of theft. Think you might find that the list entry has these sources too. GSorby - Talk! 14:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Im not accusing you of theft and it has some of the sources not all eighteen though. D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe one of you can create the article and the other can import the extra stuff from their sandbox. –anemoneprojectors– 14:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Why have you just undone my changes? D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I didn't do it on purpose. I didn't realise that you implemented your and then I saved mine. It's done now so leave it. Thanks for helping :-) 14:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok i've re edited to my version and added in your small line that you wrote yourself. The rest was lifted from my sandbox and moved around ever so slightly. Thanks D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:29, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks like you both tried to go first but D4nnyw14 was just ahead. Should have got an edit conflict... You guys will have to sort it out as I have to go now, my time is almost up for the day! Just stop edit warring ;-) –anemoneprojectors– 14:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I have done. The article is done. So let's just all leave it! I'm not a big fan of edit warring. Don't accuse me of theft either. GSorby - Talk! 14:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

It was taken from my sandbox. It isn't theft but you haven't wrote much of it at all. My sandbox was there days before yours and my version has more additional sources. Please don't edit it anymore unless you are going to be constructive D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:34, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

1) I'm looking at your sandbox and you have three duplicated references. 2)I didn't copy from your precious sandbox as I have my own abilities to create articles, having created many of the EastEnders ones. GSorby - Talk! 14:36, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Then why is the wording mostly the same and the sources? D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Because that's what the sources say!! It seems that we have the same references and those same references obviously have the same wording. it doesn't matter now. It's all done so no need for no ore arguments. GSorby - Talk! 14:40, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Im not arguing im just annoyed all my hard work was for nothing. Look at my sandbox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:D4nnyw14/sandbox) compared to Lola's page and look at characterisation. It is word for word the same and you claim that Lola was all your work. Im fed up of this conversation especially as i spent ages sourcing material and creating the page. Thanks D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:43, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Well if your fed up stop replying then :L GSorby - Talk! 14:44, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. You haven't replied with any reason why both match in more than one place because you can't come up with a reason apart from that it was stolen. I am fed up but am replying because am annoyed at you taking the whole page, rearranging it and claiming it as your own. D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:47, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Right just stop! Forget all this. Forget we ever met until now. Sorry you feel that I "stole" this but I really didn't. Let's just work on the article together with no arguments. Me and you can get this article to good article status if we work together :-) GSorby - Talk! 14:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok i'll forgot this ever happened. Sorry for accusing you and i'll work with you to help promote the article to good article status. D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:52, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay I'm glad we're now agreeing. So, let's try to dig out a few sources and extend this article :-) GSorby - Talk! 15:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I've given the article a copy edit and corrected some references. You both know of course, that while you added the content, AP actually created the article. ;) - JuneGloom Talk 16:45, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a collaboration and no one owns any articles. I don't think it is even against any policy to take work from someones sandbox...RaintheOne ^BAM 16:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

June, shhh!! Ahaha :-) and Rain I didn't :{ GSorby - Talk! 16:58, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I created the page Lola Pearce and probably started the list entry in the first place, so ner :-P –anemoneprojectors– 11:10, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Anemone please don't burst my bubble :-P GSorby - Talk! 11:14, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Ha! –anemoneprojectors– 14:13, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Hattie Tavernier

Hi all, can I request some opinions @ Talk:Hattie Tavernier, regarding her last appearance. I'd be interested in hearing what you all think about the discussion there.GunGagdin^Moan 12:30, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Zoe Slater GA

Hi guys, just popped back for a bit! I've expanded the Zoe Slater article a lot in the past hour or so-can maybe June or Gungadin just do a check through of everything- there are probably a lot of things wrong, and a lot more possible sources- if anyone's willing- go ahead! :D MayhemMario 16:01, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Slaters in Detention

Hi calling all EE people, has anyone actually watched Slaters in Detention? If so please could you add what happens, etc... to Charlie Slater's article, thanks a lot. :) MayhemMario 15:21, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

And all the other characters who appeared, right? I need to do the same for Last Tango in Walford but can't until I have internet access back at home and a working DVD player! –anemoneprojectors– 13:11, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Anyone but AP comment? MayhemMario 16:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

If anyone actually replies, but I asked this on Charlie Slater's talk page- if you do watch this- does anyone have a picture of Jason.M playing Charlie Slater? Thanks :) MayhemMario 16:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Is it even necessary to have an image of a 30 second appearance in a flashback? I'm not sure it'll qualify WP:NFCC#8. GSorby – Ping! 10:55, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Agree with GSorby! A screenshot of a minor flashback in a spin-off video won't increase readers' understanding of the subject. –anemoneprojectors– 11:19, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The Wickses

Considering their return widely reported and at times (such as this article I just saw) considered true, to not mention this "return" at all is barmy. Put it in the prose, widely reported but currently unconfirmed. U-Mos (talk) 14:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Not sure that's a good idea as it's just a rumour, and Wikipedia tends not to report rumours. –anemoneprojectors– 11:23, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

It really is just rumour like AP says.. like "person X could return at the end of the year" - Any character could. Personally I'd wait until a return is confirmed by EE themselves.RaintheOne ^BAM 12:43, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't include it... yet. With all the speculation about the Wikes boys return, I have no doubt that the BBC ARE in discsuuions with both the actors, and I strongly suspect that at least one if not both of them will return to EE over Xmas. But until we have official confirmation from the BBC and/or the actors themselves, we cant include it. Bleaney (talk) 15:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not saying we put it down as a fact! It's a rumour that's being reported by reliable source, and that makes it appropriate for inclusion as a verifiable rumour. Wikipedia doesn't ignore information from reliable sources. U-Mos (talk) 20:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Where to include it though? On the List of EastEnders characters page, we only include returning characters that have been officially confirmed by the BBC, so not there. Maybe it could be added to Pat Butchers page, as their return is reportedly to do with her exit, as well as the Simon Wicks and David Wicks pages? Bleaney (talk) 21:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes we do use reliable sources. We do not include rumours though, they reported a possible return that is not confirmed. Unless there is enough impact on the said subject - I wouldn't personally use it. If they do return, then I do not see why it cannot be mentioned then. Wikipedia has a policy on notability too - so reporting every low brow rumour going is fitting with that policy either.RaintheOne ^BAM 22:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

"Low brow"? Look at the source I linked to above. People are going to go to their character pages to find information on their return, and to find nothing there is counter-productive both in terms of information and the resulting good-faith edits of the information being added in the infoboxes in the belief it has been confirmed. I'd say even "rumour" is innacurate here; it's just not confirmed yet. U-Mos (talk) 13:12, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Anthony Moon

Hey people. I finished my draft of Anthony Moon and well, I cheated a bit and moved it over and gave him the article as it looked quite fine. I couldn't see any reason why people would disagree. If anyone does want to discuss it, just state your issues here. Anyway, looks good to me and it shouldn't be a problem. GSorby – Ping! 20:11, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Great article, well done! Bleaney (talk) 20:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Now that's a good start. :-) Ta, GSorby – Ping! 20:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Janet Mitchell

Just a quick one guys, I notice that on the Janet Mitchell page, its states that her last appearance was in May 2010, when Billy told her and her brother William that their mum and grandad had been involved in a car crash. Yet in William's entry, it states that he visited Billy & Julie in May 2011, and again in June 2011 for Billy's 50th birthday. Does any one remember if Janet also visited Billy on those two times in 2011? I have a faint reollection that she may have been 'ill' on one of them so couldn't visit, but i'm sure she wasn't absent twice. I only ask as I want to update her page? Anyone remember or got a source? Bleaney (talk) 20:33, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

she appeared when billy and julie, showed the social worker how good a family they were when lola was appearing MayhemMario 20:44, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I have updated her page. Bleaney (talk) 21:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done

Hearst

I don't know how many of you are aware, but Digital Spy, Inside Soap and All About Soap are no longer published by Hachette Filipacchi UK, but Hearst Magazines UK. So when you added DS, IS or AAS refs from now on, use Hearst. :) - JuneGloom Talk 15:58, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll get some replacing done then! GSorby – Ping! 16:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Only change ones from August 2011 - when the company took over HF-UK.RaintheOne ^BAM 16:58, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I was completely unaware of this change, but I think I've only used DS refs in E20 pages, and have just changed them to Hearst. I'll easily forget the name though. –anemoneprojectors– 13:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Few Things

Does anyone remember/know some info about William, Cora's husband, Tanya's dad, etc. The things im looking for are D.O.B, date of death, and occuaption. If anyone knows any, please reply. ALSO. Is Youtube a reliabel source, can we use it?! Aswell, any info on Debs would be greatly appreciated. MayhemMario 14:13, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Why do you work on such isolated subjects? The Cross Family...god your gonna have to pull a few strings to make this one accepted as an article. You won't find much information. GSorby – Ping! 15:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I know im going to get criticsm for choosing it and soon, but that dosent answer my question :) MayhemMario 15:39, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the Cross family is notable at all, but if you want ideas for the layout of the article, you should take a look at Ferreira family. What are you trying to cite using YouTube? It isn't a reliable source, but there maybe an alternative. - JuneGloom Talk 16:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Well I will not be helping to find any sources for Cora if the aim is to start a shitty fansite article for the Cross family.RaintheOne ^BAM 16:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Mario, perhaps as an alternative to duplicating a lot of existing material, you could concentrate your efforts on a Cross family section here? It would be lovely to get that article finished off and moved into the mainspace at some point. Frickative 16:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks that great feedback, i will look June and Frickative although that would probably more beneficial, im going to try and see if it works, before I decide. Thanks! :) Aside from all the response on the article, can anyone answer the original question?! Thanks, for the help MayhemMario 19:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

wEll June, trampikey once said that Tanyas sister Debs was mentioned when Tanya first arrived, but she hasnt been mentioned since, I want to use a video clip of Tanya saying her name, though I could use the TV credits right?!, with William I just want to know if anyone knew his occpation, date of birth or date of death, i cant remember if it was mentioned or not, thanks for the help! Oh and Rain, thats fine :) but i hope due to this, you still give sources for Gsorbys Cora's main article!!!! Thanks! MayhemMario 19:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, George asked me again, so I shall. I don't mean to be blunt, but I cannot go lecturing those editing US soaps asif they are fansites and endorse an articles creation which would only interest a fan ... and be a rehash of what is said in Tanya, Cora and Rainie's articles. The list Frickative pulled up is a good idea though, because it contains them to one list.RaintheOne ^BAM 19:36, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

im going to finish the article, then we can see if it is liable or not. Can anyone answer the original question?!? MayhemMario 20:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Did you not read the previous comments at all? Rich said: I cannot go lecturing those editing US soaps asif they are fansites and endorse an articles creation which would only interest a fan ... and be a rehash of what is said in Tanya, Cora and Rainie's articles. Which means you'd be wasting your time. That article would have no encyclopedic meaning... GSorby – Ping! 20:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

yes I can read!!!! Ahahah your so funny! Look im going to do it in my sandbox not hurt done?!, orginal question please! MayhemMario 20:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

You can cite the episode (including a time when the event occurs) for the moment when Debs is mentioned. - JuneGloom Talk 21:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

thanks June. Debs was mentioned in one ep, and never again. Do u know any of the William stuff?!, no one else is answering

MayhemMario 21:19, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm thinking about making an article for the Khan family, with the aim of splitting Shameem off. Any advice?RaintheOne ^BAM 21:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Mario, I'm afraid I don't recall much to do with William. - JuneGloom Talk 21:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I dont either

..... I don know if his D.O.B,etc has been mentioned or not. Umm.. until i get more replies we can see. Thanks June! :)MayhemMario 22:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the info on William Cross was ever mentioned. I don't know of any other families that could be notable for articles though. I'm trying to work on the Moon family. But as (whoever) said, I recommend working on User:Junipers Liege/EastEnders families if you want to write about the Cross and Khan families. –anemoneprojectors– 13:55, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

WW

Walford Web isnt a reliable source right?!, just if it isnt then i'll delete the source from WW, from Dotty's article. List of Eastenders characters 2001 (and probably others) all the sources are Walford Web, just want to make it clear if it isnt or is. :) MayhemMario 16:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Mario, when I say something why do you always bring it to discussion? WalfordWeb isn't exactly reliable but it's still a source. Even if the links are dead such as the List of EastEnders characters (2001)#Others they are still there so material can't be challenged or removed. GSorby – Ping! 21:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

This isnt at all aimed at you, dont be paranoid! I need to know because I dont want an unreliable source in EE articles. Gungadin deleted them off Manda's article which is why I have brung it up to discussion. MayhemMario 21:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

It isn't a reliable source and should be remove really. Much like Nieghbours do not use Perfectblend, H&A don't use Backtothebay, Coronation Street don't use Corrieblog and so on.RaintheOne ^BAM 21:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay agreed. But leave them in the 2001 list as a while ago this used to be a character bank that listed all minor characters as well as regulars. GSorby – Ping! 21:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I think we have got to be strict. As you are currently doing 2001, GSorby like I did 2008, maybe you could find alternatives? Also if it hasnt been done already, delete the WW on dotty article MayhemMario 21:54, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I think, before removing sources, you should look for alternatives. - JuneGloom Talk 22:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

WW can be a reliable source, it depends on what it is. But even if it's not, don't go removing it unless you can find something better. A bad source is better than no source. –anemoneprojectors– 13:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

What is in the water right now. I always thought fansites were never okay. :sRaintheOne ^BAM 14:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Am I thinking of a different site? Yeah probably. –anemoneprojectors– 14:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I think in very limited circumstances, such as an exclusive interview with a cast member, fansites are sometimes acceptable, but I've already written a treatise on Walford Web use here. I can't see any benefit in retaining the fan poll in Dotty Cotton, or the 2001 list links, particularly as that content is dead anyway. Frickative 14:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that! byeeee :-)x –anemoneprojectors– 14:32, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

EE Award

I feel this project dosent work as a team as a much as before. This is probably because we all edit at different times, etc. But to try and get our spirits back up, I have introduced the EE Award which will fill in the 'white gap' on the left hand side of WP:EE. It wasnt being used, though some may be agaisnt it. I think we have sometimes got to award a user for a signifacant bit of work they did, as sometimes it does feel your work goes unappreciated. Now, this is my perosnal view, though the first award I have put on the main page. I hope you all warm to this new scheme,remember im just trying to help!!! :D MayhemMario 11:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

It's totally unneeded. We have a soaps award, we don't need a more specific one just for us. We all know everyone here does a great job, so we don't need to go around kissing each other's arses with this silly "barnstar". You should have got consensus first. I'm going to remove it. P.S. I might be back full time soon. –anemoneprojectors– 13:16, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

That's great news AP! Okay, fine, just trying to think of new ideas :P MayhemMario 13:21, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

That's ok. Hope you don't mind me just reverting you like that. Also I reckon it'll be one of those things that would get forgotten about anyway! –anemoneprojectors– 13:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I mean I was happy to do it, but I guess I do have a goldfish memory. -.- MayhemMario 11:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Mario, is this your roundabout way of telling us you dont feel appreciated enough? :) I think it should go without saying that any work done on the articles is much appreciated, but I do also agree that positive feedback is important sometimes. Wikipedia is quite thankless. I dont think we need an award of the month, but I will do my best to give praise when it's due :) GunGagdin^Moan 16:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Poppy Meadow

Hi, just created a sandbox for Poppy Meadow, its located here, if you want to see it split off or not, comment!!! I sourced the storylines, due to a lot of GA, (although im highly unlkiely to be nomianting this), reveiwers wanting the storylines to be sourced, aswell as Frickative sorucing Ben Mitchell (EastEnders). :) MayhemMario 18:30, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah... I went ahead and did it :) MayhemMario 19:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Reverted. Poppy is a minor character and you're copying me again by moving the article over without asking, I did that with Anthony as he's a potential character, you started sourcing the storylines after you seen my article. I moved Anthony over as a bold edit as I knew he was eligible. Poppy is not even 10% eligible. GSorby – Ping! 19:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

This probably should have been discussed with the project first. Personally I don't think Poppy is notable enough for her own article. - JuneGloom Talk 20:46, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I also think Poppy's fine as she is :-) –anemoneprojectors– 15:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay second time round, I really think Poppy's eligible to split. Once the new IS comes out, there's bound to be some about there departure, aswell as this weeks IS which is somehwere in my house :P. ANYwayy.... She has 43 refs,and good chunk of reception. I just hope that some critic comments on their departures but anyway what do you think. And im really sorry GSorby, :P MayhemMario 13:31, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Just FYI the last IS confirms Poppy's a "supporting character". Incidentally this may be a better term for "recurring" or "guest". Mario, I'd like to see any additions you've made in your sandbox implemented to the existing article (without changing the order of things for the time being). –anemoneprojectors– 15:23, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Great work Mario. Well done. You are getting so good at sourcing and expanding. I, however, dont think it should be a standalone article personally. She is a very minor character who has had very few central storylines of merit. I think this is the kind of character who is made for the lists to be honest, because it gives them sourced material. But that's just my personal preference, but as it does have 43 refs, there isnt a great deal stopping it being separated by wiki policy. So, if you feel that strongly about it, you would be within rights to split.GunGagdin^Moan 15:54, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Personally Mario, I'd just use this to chunk up the list :) GSorby – Ping! 16:25, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I feel stongly about it. But then that goes aginst most people. I think if it only had 20 refs- NO. 30- Okayish 40- i think it would be a bit wierd if it werent split off. I think it shows that the charcater is popular due to so many people commenting on her, so can I go ahead and split, please :P MayhemMario 20:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

It is good what you did there. She isn't really that notable... you are lucky she has had so many passing mentions - even if at best, most are are trivial mentions. Even "clutching at straws" sometimes ... such as citing a the way she was described in Inside Soap's cryptic clue as part of their weekly crossword... I'd prefer it in the list, but you've scraped the barrel at basically proved that she passes the general notability. You've got a good eye for creating articles out of nobodies like heather chasen, dotty and co. At the end of the day though, you work hard - atleast you can say you go out of your way to make a point about a subject. So I do not see why we should try and block Poppy's creation. PS. I think the pictures of Charlie and Jossa are daft though..RaintheOne ^BAM 20:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I partially agree with Gungadin, I think she is a character made for the lists. How many refs would you have if you removed the ones citing storylines? The draft needs one hell of a copy edit (pretty is spelt wrong twice and "Apparently, according to The Sun" makes me want to tear my hair out), you've got a mixture of single and double quotes, critisised and characterisation are spelt the American way despite the subject being British, the two separate headings in the reception section are not needed, and finally I think "Introduction" and "Return and departure" should be merged into one "Casting" section. I just don't understand why you're so desperate to split her from the list, surely there are better and more notable characters that need more attention? - JuneGloom Talk 21:08, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm actually quite surprised no one else brought up the fact the article needs a damn good copy edit. - JuneGloom Talk 21:15, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreeing with June, why not work on more notable characters? You obviously have the skills for it and I don't have as much time on my hands anymore since I've started working. For example, there are plenty of already split off characters such as the likes of Anthony Trueman or Kate Mitchell that need some attention. I may have time to do it on the weekend but there could be so much more done with you helping out with these articles. I'm taking care of the lists. I'll be sure to tidy and expand all of the lists so don't worry about them. All I want you to worry about are silly stubs as I mentioned above. I could even give you some articles that need working on to get you started:

• Danny Moon
• Keith Miller
• Anthony Trueman
• KATE MITCHELL!
• Demi Miller

I know it may sound rather boring but you know, why not focus on the articles that really should already be merged into lists? After most of them are sorted out then we can think about splitting off other from lists. By the way, most of Poppy's references are from the storyline section which you only did after seeing me citing two in Anthony's section! I only did this to reference the notable storyline of him stealing the money and betting against Tyler. Anyway, I think you should work on those articles before you do anything else. They are so bad. GSorby – Ping! 21:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree the article does need a copy edit, the lead is bad too. To add to that - it is still reading asif it is in the list. I agree with George's suggestion, though we cannot dictate to Mario what should be using his free time for. However, I'm pretty sure the universal feeling here is one of tiring, tiring of accomodating your bit part character articles. We have green lighted quite a few so far - but that won't happen forever - your subject matter gets more obscure as you go along. So in future you may be wasting your time flogging us these dead horses. So that is the heads up.RaintheOne ^BAM 21:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

As you said Rain, only a few suggestions :) GSorby – Ping! 09:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hi Mario, great effort! :) I agree with what others have said, in that you're obviously very talented at gathering sources. If anything, I think the sandbox draft suffers from source overload right now, so it's hard to give a strong opinion. What I mean by that is, in readability terms, sometimes less is much more. I wouldn't be so bold as to edit your sandbox, but if I were to take a stab at re-phrasing the "Characterisation" section, for instance, it would probably look something like this (albeit less rough and ready, because I've thrown this together in fifteen minutes while half asleep :p):

The EastEnders website describes Poppy as someone who "may come across as a pretty faced bimbo", but is willing to stand up for herself, is not a push-over, and "woe betide you should you cross her". Several critics have described Poppy as "ditzy". Sarah Dempster of The Guardian deemed her "dumb", and RTE called her "insane" and "irritating". Poppy is a brunette beautician who wears false nails, and is best friends with Jodie. In a press release announcing their departure, they were described as "giggly girls"; Digital Spy's Daniel Kilkelly and the Daily Star have similarly referred to them as a "ditzy duo".

If you re-examine your sources, you'll find that a couple of them are exact copy/pastes of the same press release. So, of course the Huffington Post and MSN described Poppy in the same way - it's the same article! ;) By paring it down a bit, I think it becomes more readable - but also, at barely over 100 words long, not necessarily something that requires an entire subsection to itself. I think you've done a good job laying your hands on every source about Poppy available, but now along with the copy edit June recommended, I think the key is in refining the material you have to see if it still looks like something that belongs in the mainspace, rather than a list. Frickative 11:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

All the advice above seems sound, Mario. If most of the sources are from storylines and you are using duplicates and obscure mentions in a crossword etc, then this questions notability somewhat. I kind of feel smilarly to Rain, in that I dont fully understand your desire to have minor characters separaetd from lists. It's almost as if you think the information being in a list lessens its value. It doesn't. And most wont care where the information is (a list or a separate page), because what's important is that the information is included on wiki, and if it's in a list, it's still included on wiki. Perhaps all that troubles you then, is that lists cant have images? After the copyedit, and the culling of duplicate or unecessary sources in plot, we can reassess. How does that sound? GunGagdin^Moan 13:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Not finished reading this discussion yet but omg i can't believe Mario has used the crossword as a source!!! And just to say her name is the same as a flower? Sorry but that's ridiculous!!! –anemoneprojectors– 15:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I like what Frickative and everyone is saying. I think it's good to bulk up the list, but also I think a major copyedit of the draft is in order first, then merge that into the list and reassess it then. –anemoneprojectors– 15:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay there is a lot of replies to reply to. :P Just to make it clear, the more I think about it, the more I dont want Poppy to be split off. I think Gungadin hit the nail on the head- Poppy is described as 'brunette', but she cannot have an image in the list. ANYWAY,to the replies-

• Rain- Deleted image of Luaren/Darren  Done, umm... can I at least have credit for Heather Chasen :P Please?
• June According to the Sun gone.  Done Split 'Departure/Intro/Return into Casting  Done. Positive/Negative criticism deleted  Done. The thing is there are amny articles which could be made- but GSorby has got all of them in his sandbox!!!! Cora, Tyler, Afia, Greg, Julie, etc. :P
• GSorby- great examples!!! Um.. Right I really dont want to do this But, I got the idea of referencing the storylines from Frickative, sorry, b) I may do them articles c) Can we all not do the list, I mean there are 26 years!!! I dont see why you should do them all- although im contradicting myself here- who did List of EastEnders characters (2008)?
• Raintheone- Okay :D, though not all have been :)
• Frickative (the best comment)- Thank you! I agreed with all your comments and even sneakly copy/pasted that into the sandbox (hope you dont mind).
• Gungadin you hit the nail on the head- I thought about what you said and reliazed this was probably why. ahahha, well done! :)
• AP (X2)- Okay, will do! :)

- Thanks guys for all the feedback, its nice for everyone (nearly) to comment on one thing- so I get many opinions. Im on my way to do the copy edit, umm... (Frickative if you have time, please coudl you help?) :) MayhemMario 17:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I think I have finished. MayhemMario 17:27, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

It looks like there might be some more (maybe minor stuff) that needs to be done. I'd go over it myself but just don't have the time! –anemoneprojectors– 13:37, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Mario, only just saw this. I don't mind at all, and will happily go over the article later this afternoon :) Frickative 14:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay Mario, I've spent over an hour on it, tightening things up, copy-editing, formatting the references etc. I hope you don't think I've been too brutal, but I also hope the draft is in better shape for it! Perhaps others would like to take another look now? I'm largely torn - it would either make a very substantial list entry, or a rather insubstantial stand-alone article. I think its greatest asset is the Reception section, and it's a shame there's no prospect of a x5 expansion, because The Guardian quote calling her "perhaps the greatest television bit-part character of the modern age" would make a wonderful DYK hook. Frickative 15:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

It looks great. Really, really good. I added another interview with Bright, so some info has been added to reception. If you want to see it, be my guest and change it if you want too. :P MayhemMario 18:22, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad you approve :) I'm about to make a few tweaks which I'll explain in the edit summary, but the main thing is that not all of that interview is reception - Bright saying what her favourite scene was is unrelated to how the character was received. Perhaps it would work better up in Casting? And Mario, just because you don't think you can find a reference for something doesn't mean you should remove a Citation needed tag - otherwise there'd be no point in WP:V :p Yes the party happened off-screen, but the episode it was mentioned in can be cited, right? Is it even important to her storylines? Frickative 18:28, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I feel the 'party' shanagan isnt relavnt so I deleted it, her favourite scene can go in casting right, Bright being nothing like Poppy can go in characterization??? Hmm... What do you think? MayhemMario 18:39, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done

Print resources

I thought it might be a good idea to make a list of the print sources we have access to between us. Prompted by my county library group dropping inter-library loans from £1 to 25p - it'd be rude not to at that price, so if anyone thinks they could put content from the following to good use, just give me a shout:

• EastEnders: The Inside Story by J. Smith & T. Holland
• EastEnders: The First 10 Years, A Celebration by Colin Brake
• Blood Ties: The life and loves of Grant Mitchell by Kate Lock
• Who's Who in EastEnders by Kate Lock
• EastEnders: Happy 15th birthday presented by Barbara Windsor
• EastEnders: 20 years in Albert Square by Rupert Smith Frickative 22:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

You have access to all those? I don't have access to any. I think Gungadin owns at least one of them. But why no 25th anniversary book? :-( –anemoneprojectors– 13:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I have all those except the Blood Ties. The docu with Babs Windsor has a few interviews with the cast that could be useful. I havent seen my copy in a long time, so not sure I still have it. Have you watched it Frick, was any of it worthy of inclusion? GunGagdin^Moan 16:21, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ack, sorry, I totally forgot starting this! I haven't watched the Babs documentary - these are just the ones I could lay my hands on easily now my library service have sorted themselves out. I should be picking up Who's Who and 20 Years next week to see if there's anything I can use for Ben, but I'm not holding my breath on that score. Frickative 21:25, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Promotional Photographs

Hello everyone. I've just dropped to raise the issue with promotional photographs. They are starting to get a little too much now and I highly prefer television screenshots. This all started when Frickative uploaded one of Vanessa stating it was for promotion for the character's arrival. After this, more and more promotional photographs have started to creep in and it's starting to overload. That is my personal opinion. GSorby – Ping! 14:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

GSorby has also contacted me on my talk page regarding one of Rainie. There is great reason behind all these promo's being added. It means that i.e. for Poppy, We all know that she was bubbly, happy, etc. But when a screenshot is put as her picture which shows her sad- I.M.O. it dosent show her characters personality. Therefore a discussion between me and Frickative decided that my opinion is orginal research (dur...). Therefore we decided we should use Poppys promo, because that's the BBC's picture they have chosen for the character. I think it would be good if Frickative commented on this- as She can describe what I put above- most likely better. :D MayhemMario 14:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

(For the record, Frickative is a she :p). GSorby, we've had this discussion before - can you point to anything in the NFCC, or any legal reason that promotion photographs shouldn't be used, beyond your own personal preference? I've also quoted this before, but the issue has been discussed at the non-free content talk page, and I'm in agreement with User:Masem's stance that: ""we should strongly suggest users seek official media and use that over screenshots or personal scans, particularly when the official media is officially distributed: it improves the sourcing requirements for NFC, one less person in the chain of copyrights, and a few others. It is still NFC at the end of the day, and no more a legal issue than a user-taken screenshot, but it is probably better from an encyclopedic standpoint.". Frickative 15:07, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I dunno if I'm for or against. I'm in two minds.. My view is you atleast need to have the correct information about appearance in the article to justify a promo. Vanessa had that. Some others haven't - someone such as Manda.. she is hardly known for her get up. With a screenshot, we normally focus on the subjects face and the rationale matches that. With some promo's there is more copyrighted work actually in the image. Such as The Vic, The Albert Square sign, other sets... Not sure what the laws about clothing.. So if they were going to be used in numbers, I'd expect individual rationales written for each of them - pointing out there purpose.RaintheOne ^BAM 15:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

In fairness, every rationale should be equally diligent, be it for a promo or screen shot (I'm sure we're all equally guilty of copy/pasting generic rationales from time to time ;)). Another way of looking at it is, screenshots that capture only the face are actually more easily replaceable by free content than if you've got a character's costume and the recognisable setting in, because there's not usually anything so extraordinary about make-up that a headshot of the actor wouldn't suffice as a free equivalent. Frickative 15:51, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh don't say that, you'll have the image police around telling us to use the free actor images.RaintheOne ^BAM 15:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Ha, it's a serious point though - for example, which image would be less replaceable by the Shane Richie freebie? Alfie's face or Alfie? Frickative 16:08, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Im SO conufsed. :/ But I prefer the promo's because there in the setting of EastEnders and it kinda just looks neater.MayhemMario 16:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Captions

Was there a discussion about why they're being deleted? Im just not sure why all of a sudden there being deleted- I added one to Poppy, because Vanessa Gold's still got one, but now im confused.... MayhemMario 16:26, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, i thought we already covered this a while ago, and it was consensus that captions were harmless inclusion and in fact useful, because it tells readers what year the image was taken.GunGagdin^Moan 16:33, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

It's just GSorby has been deleting them- with Poppy it says 'A promotional image of Poppy' or somehting to them words... :) MayhemMario 12:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Mario! I was all wrapped up in the removing that I didn't realise that Poppy's said a promotional photograph! Well captions are not needed unless more than one actor has portrayed the character or the character has a promo photo, otherwise I don't think it matters what year that screenshot is taken. GSorby – Ping! 21:02, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

How so? If someone is interested to know, then it matters to them.GunGagdin^Moan 21:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

We were going to keep the caption if the character had appeared in more than one year and it was a screenshot, so we could say what year, also if there were two or more actors. Ben Mitchell's caption is the best though. –anemoneprojectors– 15:47, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Tyler Moon

Just wondered if anyone's working on splitting Tyler Moon off. Seems odd having Anthony done and not Tyler, and surely there's enough stuff by now. Regardless, can someone update his storyline ;) –anemoneprojectors– 14:52, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeahh! I'll do it tonight, I've already started him ages ago here. Promise I'll split him tonight! GSorby – Ping! 14:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

ok cool. I think a history merge will be a good idea, so an admin will have to do that. –anemoneprojectors– 14:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Can you not do that now and I'll work on it when I get home? GSorby – Ping! 15:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sure others can revert if they object. They probably won't. –anemoneprojectors– 15:08, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Derek Branning

Hey guys, keep an eye on Derek Branning (his list entry and the redirect) as a sockpuppet split him off today at 11:45 and no one noticed until now. - JuneGloom Talk 23:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I would have noticed at 11.46, probably, if I had been around!  :-) People need to make sure these pages are watchlisted. As he's an old character, people might not have him there. I have every single EE page, redirect, list, image, category etc on mine! –anemoneprojectors– 14:09, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I hope you asked everyone for a new computer this Christmas. I'll watchlist it.RaintheOne ^BAM 16:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I've also watchlisted it. By the way everyone, I'm working on a draft for Derek here so he should be done soon. Take a look! And Rain, if you can find anything on Derek, sources etc, it would be appreciated :-) Thanks GSorby – Ping! 16:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

There are some freebie pics of Foreman on Flickr [1], [2], [3] - the first and third should crop down fairly well :) Frickative 13:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I shall be importing one of them tonight :) GSorby – Ping! 13:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Ooh, and there's one already on Commons, too - File:James Purefoy and Jamie Foreman, Rochester Castle.jpg - but I do like the closer shots. Frickative 14:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

That's a bit small. Dammit, that would've been a goodun as well -.- GSorby – Ping! 14:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Would it be so bad if it was cropped? –anemoneprojectors– 14:11, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. I'll just upload the good ones with the upload tool later. Btw, have you seen my draft for Derek? GSorby – Ping! 14:31, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes I saw it. Looks pretty good. Has every IS source been exhausted? (in other articles as well) - I've saved all the ones I've bought just in case I find something to add when I get back! –anemoneprojectors– 15:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Done it! Check out my awesome article here. I moved it over via history merge. GSorby – Ping! 23:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Not many sources then George.RaintheOne ^BAM 00:06, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Er, aren't personality and characterisation the same thing? - JuneGloom Talk 00:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Sadly not, all the sources I found is literally everything. Pfffffft, I thought there would be much more. You could always give me some scans from Inside Soap if you have anything on Derek? That would be helpful :) Cheers. And June, I'm tired so that was a little niggle ;)GSorby – Ping! 00:14, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, there doesn't appear to be an actual discussion about splitting him off... (and you might want to do something about the first two sentences in the reception section) - JuneGloom Talk 00:18, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not against the split, but the reception section is mostly characterisation quotes from Foreman that should be moved to that section. –anemoneprojectors– 12:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Whitney's Story

Hi, starting to do the article, but when do you think the storyline officialy started and ended, I.M.O. it would be from when Rob first appearance to Rob's last, any thoughts? MayhemMario 17:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC) Also including shall I list all producers who produced/write the episodes?? MayhemMario 17:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Debs Cross??

Has it been mentioned in EE that there is a Debs Cross (Cora's daughter and Tanya & Rainie's sister)? People keep adding the name to character infoboxes, but I havent heard of her?? Bleaney (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

She was metioned by as Tanya's and Rainie's aunt, I think. Also if you didnt know Rainie's leaving its in the new IS- but I looked at it and didnt buy it, also anyone want to reply above? MayhemMario 18:04, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

There was a small discussion about her inclusion here - Talk:Branning family#Debs? (The link to the clip where she is mentioned is also there). - JuneGloom Talk 19:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

What?! Tell me, what exactly did it say? Did it say "Rainie is leaving EastEnders" or did it just say Rainie's disappearance or something? GSorby – Ping! 19:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Im sorry to break this to you, but she is if I remember rightly its says 'RAINIE LEAVES WALFORD/THE SQUARE. MayhemMario 21:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Let's just hope she's doing a disappearing act and comes back in a month or something. I'm sure they would mention this on DS or similar if she was leaving the show... GSorby – Ping! 21:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

From what I saw on the article it looked like she was leaving for good. :( MayhemMario 21:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Here- http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2/eastenders/spoilers/a353115/zainab-and-yusefs-wedding-day-arrives.html MayhemMario 21:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Rainie's leaving? Ha! –anemoneprojectors– 14:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

No she's not, I asked Franks on her website, and she said she is with EE until they don't need her anymore and that her departure would be announced. GSorby – Ping! 14:06, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Well that's good. I assumed it would be a temporary thing, like Christian's current departure. –anemoneprojectors– 14:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Sarah Hills

Hey everyone. Just to let you all know, I've remerged Sarah Hills back into List of EastEnders characters (1995) as her article was ridiculously short and had no references. GSorby – Ping! 09:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

There was one reference on the talk page, and she was one of a list of many with the potential to be expanded, we are pretty sure the sources are out there, but nobody has looked yet. –anemoneprojectors– 14:10, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

i have tons of refs for sarah hills. just have never got around to adding. there is a lot out there. shouldnt be merged. expansion would be better. maybe mario can help?GunGagdin^Moan 18:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

If you have time, could you list them somewhere? Might make it easier for the person who wants to expand it. –anemoneprojectors– 14:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I'll take care of that if you like, I don't mind expanding her article. I need the refs first though, perhaps list them at Talk:Sarah Hills? :) GSorby – Ping! 14:28, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Her image has been tagged as orphaned, good if we can do it before it goes (or just sneak it to the list for now!) –anemoneprojectors– 14:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Okay we can expand now without losing the image (cough xD) By the way, you do realise we can have list images if we give each one a unique and detailed rationale. GSorby – Ping! 14:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Nicely coughed. Yes I did realise that, but they'd have to be as strong as the Vanessa Gold one, for example. –anemoneprojectors– 14:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I could do that. Practice makes perfect eh? GSorby – Ping! 14:59, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

A lot of the stuff I got was collected from a pay per view site that I once had access to. I copied the articles into word. What I may do is email them to George and yourself and whoever else wants them, so that way the information is shared? It's unfortunate but I have never had the time to use the sources for many of the characters I searched for.GunGagdin^Moan 15:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Probably best if you email it to George, if he doesn't mind. That is unfortunate, I know you did a lot of background research. –anemoneprojectors– 15:17, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah go for it. desroid@gmail.com. Thanks :) GSorby – Ping! 15:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Hey George. I have just sent you a fuck load of EE files with hundreds of EE articles I downloaded. Hope that's OK. Sarah (as well as tons of other characters) is among those sent. Some of the file names may not make much sense. They possibly made sense to me at one time but no more. Even the files named 'Gita' for instance, may contain other characters other than Gita Kapoor.GunGagdin^Moan 18:40, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Jesus, there's hundreds of files here. I'll download them later. Thank you so much for these, it's gonna keep me occupied :-) GSorby – Ping! 09:05, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Archive links

I've been making a archive link sandbox - I've been doing it for all the soaps but I had a big splash out on finding EE ones earlier. Here it is - Some good ones, mostly interviews atm, maybe there is something that takes your fancy. I also had a look through some mags and listed some. Obviously I cannot mass link those, but you guys know where to find me.RaintheOne ^BAM 02:11, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Wow! Richie you have seriously outdone yourself here! Very well done and thanks so much! This will keep me busy forever :) GSorby – Ping! 11:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Great stuff, especially the old EastEnders website interviews. I still have some of the magazines you've listed that I was planning to add to articles when I had time. Plus I never throw out a piece of paper if I've used it to reference! Well, maybe I have done but no longer! –anemoneprojectors– 14:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I never replied! Well if you need any of the above, I'll always help. AP - I can never throw anything out anymore either. I'm throwing other things out from under my bed, to make room for my hoard of ever growing newspapers and magazines.RaintheOne ^BAM 17:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't have any space under my bed (wrong type of bed but it would be so handy) but have been cutting down my soap mags and other stuff by only keeping the pages with EastEnders stuff and any pages that'll help with a full citation! –anemoneprojectors– 13:48, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Daily mail Christmas

I thought this was nice, thin mentions in the most but it kinda profiles EE at Xmas over the years. It is kind of a memorable moment thing and an extra ref in reception sections - or a ref for episode ratings.[4]RaintheOne ^BAM 17:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Gungadin could use that, she's been working on a Christmas in EastEnders article for years ;-) –anemoneprojectors– 13:48, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Durations

This has to be brought up again, and im going to be the person who does. I personally feel the durations are all wrong. I dont want to speak for Bleaney, but I agree with him, for example;

• Kim Fox (IMO) should be: 2009, 2010-
• Afia Khan (IMO) should be: 2009, 2010-
• Amira Shah (IMO) should be: 2009-2010, 2011-
• Jill Marsden (IMO) should be: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2009-10, 2012-

Please discuss! MayhemMario 20:59, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Mario here except with Afia and Kim because they appear so close to the next year, like Afia's last episode in 2009 was 31 December, I'm sure you get what I mean. And yes, everyone, we need to sort out the durations. What's the point of a duration field if we always keep one year if they haven't appeared for just a little less than a calender year? Amira for example, she should definitely be 2009–10, 2011—. This way it reflects the characters years in the show accurately. GSorby – Ping! 17:57, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think this needed a request for comment, but if people think we need to discuss the durations on an individual basis, then it's fine. Do it on that article's talk page, probably. For example, Peggy can stay as she is, but maybe Sonia should be changed. –anemoneprojectors– 15:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree, as Wikipedia is meant to be an online encyclopedia of information I find the durations terribly misleading. Amira Shah is a prime example. She was not in the soap from April 2010 to October 2011 so she has NOT been in EastEnders from 2009 to present? She appeared from 2009 to 2010 and then again from 2011. It is factually incorrect the way it is being represented, and I don't see the problem in the old way? Alex250P (talk) 20:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm just gonna go ahead and change them, someone can always revert me if they disagree. Btw Mario, I just found that Afia did actually appear until 5 January 2010, so Afia's duration is actually correct [5] GSorby – Ping! 20:25, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the all new, singing and dancing WP:EE. The place where you can do as you like, disregard each others opinions and write about the wallpaper.Rain the 1 20:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Rain your coming out with some good ones lately, first Amira cockroach (I spit my tea out when I saw that!) and now this!!! Yes GSorby, I think we should wait and per what AP said, discuss it on indivual pages. MayhemMario 20:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Haha Rain, what funny timing - I just turned the page of 20 Years in Albert Square to find a nice colour photograph of Julia Smith choosing wallpaper for the Queen Vic. Are you suggesting I shouldn't write an article about it? :'(! Seriously though, if we're having/going to have another big discussion about the duration parameter, at this point my !vote would just be to get rid of it. We already have first dates, last dates, portrayer dates and introducer dates. If it's more complicated than can be conveyed through all of that, it's frankly best explained in the body of the article anyway. Frickative 00:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Will anyone even care what any of these characters did in 100 years' time? :D –anemoneprojectors– 15:05, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Lydia Simmonds

Hey everyone. I made a draft for Lydia Simmonds here. Not a very notable character but she has quite a bit of OOU info and over 20 references (and even more when I cite the storylines). She eligible in my opinion. GSorby – Ping! 13:00, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

There is no potential to build the article past what it is cus the old dear pegged it. Looks so thin and incomplete at a first glance - but it is complete. You do realise there are that number of sources - only because of Digital Spy reporting on her so much. Then the rest are episode citations. Sources doesn't always scream out notability. What did she do apart from tag along with Janine handing out put downs.Rain the 1 16:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

You say that but how different is she than Poppy Meadow apart from being miserable and just a few less episodes? What did Poppy do apart from tag along with Jodie handing out thick comments ;)? Anyway have a look now, I've expanded it a bit. GSorby – Ping! 17:53, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

George! I could be ignore your comparison and wave Otherstuff at you - seeings as I said I draw the line at Poppy - when will it end with these new articles on non entities - but at the end of the day you've put effort into this - You have satisfied me by going back and giving it the extra push. The old bag passes obviously GNG so why not. But hey, what is everyone else going to say - and may they change my mind? ;) Why did you link Jodie too, I have watched it for a long time now dear.Rain the 1 05:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I dunno why I linked Jodie...Hrmm. And Okay, I'll await other opinions to see what everyone else says. Thanks! GSorby – Ping! 05:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Against. The character is not notable enough. She only appeared in 13 episodes, which is hardly any. Lydia was only brought into the soap for

• a) One storyline
• b) to allow Janine to show her 'sensitive' side and to become rich.

Other than that Lydia did not do much else. I think this character should stay in the list. The reception is poor. The character did not even get a promo, which means that EastEnders did not think of Lydia as a important character. Im mean Martina Quinn got one, she wasnt very notable, but if she got one and Lydia didnt, it shows how notable Lydia is. Also, the character is onyl 1/2 as notbale as it is due to the recast. If poor Tyzack (RIP) pulled out due to illness, then sadly died, the article would have not so many references, I think 8? if the recast hadnt happened. On top of this, Poppy is far more notable than Lydia, she appeared in 28. So nah! Joking! :P MayhemMario 16:40, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Eh? I thought you were waiting before the move?Rain the 1 23:23, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

GSorby, why say your going to wait, when you dont? :/ MayhemMario 13:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

It's done now, no-one cares. GSorby – Ping! 18:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't blame him for splitting it tbh ... There was once an agreement that characters with not a lot of info were better suited to lists, because they would try and take the lists to Featured List status. I've never seen an effort to try and take a list there... and then there were several minor characters before this split off, so I guess it doesn't matter anymore.Rain the 1 18:38, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, lists aren't my thing. I hate them so much. Featured lists won't ever happen in the EastEnders articles and it gives the split off articles more chance of becoming a good article. Take Yusef for example, he only has 19 references and made it to GA with less info than Lydia. Mario by the way, why did you change Lydia to guest when it was never discussed to change her to guest? Recurring is bad enough. Additionally Mario, when you add classification fields, you always miss a space out in the middle, for example, instead of Present; regular, you put Present;regular. Don't do this, it bugs me, remember that space :)! Anyway done and dusted. GSorby – Ping! 18:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I think if we do source the storylines, we can get many more characters split off. Such as Greg, Afia, Cora ect. BUT! Like you said about Yusef I think we should try and get it to the best level as possible! Will do GSorby, great work on Lydia! I hope you dont mind me in some respects 'tearing it apart', you see above? There is a source there from my sandbox which you can use! :P MayhemMario 18:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Sourcing plot with episode descriptions does not equate to greater notability, and anyone who bothers to scrutinize the articles will spot that instantly. Episodes citations and summaries are considered primary sources. Secondary source information is what makes a subject notable. If a character is truly notable for being a fictional character, it will be discussed in secondary sources. Mario does make a good point re Lydia, in that she is mostly notable in secondary sources beyond plot desriptions because of the actress recast, which adds weight to the actress being notable, not necessarily the character. Personally, I would have opposed Lydia's split, but I am not particularly bothered now it has already been done and you may get objections from AP :) GunGagdin^Moan 19:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I would have been against this split. Not read the above, but I think discussions should go on for at least a week before anything happens, thus giving people like me a chance to take part. –anemoneprojectors– 15:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I still disagree with this. I think it should move back to the list. Lydia appeared in the same amount of eps as that Kylie girl (you know the one who shot Jack, you dont know, no, I'd forgot her too) MayhemMario 20:58, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah you're right. –anemoneprojectors– 15:01, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Jill Marsden

I think I have finished my sandbox article for Jill Marsden, just in time for her return. :) Its here, I hope everyone's happy with it. I dont see any reason it cannot be split off, so Im going to ask AP to do a history merge (if its okay with him) and GSorby to upload Marsden promo? Sound good? :) MayhemMario 20:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Well done Mario. I'll go through it and have a look. It looks very good to me. And in reply to my userpage question about her photo, when she's split off, I'll upload the promo. Additionally, just ask me to request the history merge and I'll do it for you. GSorby – Ping! 20:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

:: GSorby, can you do the history merge then, request it, that is. I'll let AP know. MayhemMario 20:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, i'll just wait. MayhemMario 20:49, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Hold the phone, is this all there is to the discussion about splitting Jill Marsden off? - JuneGloom Talk 22:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I dont agree with a split.GunGagdin^Moan 22:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I did warn this would happen eventually. Give a toe, take the leg. Rainie won't hurt, suppose we'll support Kim, Dotty - hmm..kay, fine split Manda, Lola, Anthony, Tyler... Poppy, Amira's cockroach, Lydia, Jill - who is next? Maybe I shouldn't ask that because "no one cares".. So I do not support Jill being split off. WP:EE's turned into a flippin fansite. In reply to your earlier example GSorby - You are right, Yusef passed with flying colours with minimal sources - which is mind numbing for those who spend time exhausting every source they can before nominating - just so it passes the "broad coverage" requirement.Rain the 1 23:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Well...Mario, Rain did say not to bother with Jill, if I can remember. I've reverted the history merge request as we don't all agree. GSorby – Ping! 23:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

"Amira's cockroach" LMAO! GunGagdin^Moan 23:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Can't be bothered to read this either but I agree with the comment that WP:EE is turning into a fansite! But I do sort of like the article, particularly the related media section. –anemoneprojectors– 15:25, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

The article is good.GunGagdin^Moan 19:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I was in such a rush yesterday, that I completley forgot to do a discussion, sorry June Gungadin, AP, GSorby and Rain, my fault! Thank-you very much AP and Gungadin, I spent ages on it, it seems!!! :P MayhemMario 19:04, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey, do yout still want the discussion to carry on, I feel awful! If so, thats fine by me! MayhemMario 20:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

No, it's done now, and having read it, it is a decent article and separation seems appropriate, so I would have likely changed my vote anyway.GunGagdin^Moan 20:59, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Afia Masood

Hello all. I've finished my hard work on Afia. You can take a look at it here. Not my best article, not my worst either. She's notable and has 19 references. A big thanks to Raintheone for finding some sources for me. What do you reckon? I'll leave you all to discuss it. GSorby – Ping! 20:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

TBH, most of the info is a recap of her storylines, none of it specifically about her. Shes a notable character, but I dont know... Im half and half, theres no big interviews with Meryl. Although thats not anyones fault that Meryl hasnt done any interviews, it does mean that none of its her opinion, but someones elses. Like you said, wait for others. But good work!!!! :) MayhemMario 20:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure how useful these discussions about splitting are now, as things keep being done without concensus no matter what is suggested on this page anyway.GunGagdin^Moan 20:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Nope, let's do it properly. I will wait to see what everyone thinks, then we can decide at the end. What do you think Gungadin? GSorby – Ping! 21:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I am getting to the way of thinking that, if someone satisfies notability guidelines with any character, then who is anyone else to say no the araticle shouldnt be created. But with Afia, I think splitting is probably a good idea, as everything can be expanded anyway, it's too long for the list and it meets notability guidelines. Well done George.GunGagdin^Moan 21:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

My view on Afia is totally different - She is a regular, with her own storyline and has been part of a big storyline with Yusef. She has potential to grow too.Rain the 1 21:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, this is good. I'll just wait a while longer because I'm sure Anemone would like to have a say in this. GSorby – Ping! 13:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the ding dong! I'm finally all caught up on my watchlist for the Christmas pediod now anyway! I think Afia is fine to split off :-) –anemoneprojectors– 15:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Can you do the history merge before you go? GSorby – Ping! 15:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I have 15 minutes left, so I can do it within that time. –anemoneprojectors– 15:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Or wait until tomorrow. Is everyone agreed? You can always do the article now and I'll do the merge tomorrow afternoon. –anemoneprojectors– 15:27, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

I've done the move. The merge can be done tomorrow. Thanks, GSorby – Ping 18:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done –anemoneprojectors– 13:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Common V current names for characters

This little poisoned chalice again!! I saw this conversation on the Pat Evans talk page, and thought I would expand it out on here to include other characters -

I agree that the likes of Tanya, Jay, Tiffany, Amira, Afia, Fatboy, Bianca and Stacey should be listed by their commonly known names rather than their current names (So therefore we list Tanya as a Branning not a Jessop, Jay as a Brown not a Mitchell, Tiffany as a Dean not a Butcher, Amira as a Shah not a Masood... etc).

But shouldn't this be applied to other characters as well? So therefore -

• Shouldn't Dot be listed as Dot Cotton, not Dot Branning?
• Shouldn't Pat be listed as Pat Butcher, not Pat Evans?
• Shouldn't Kat be listed as Kat Slater, not Kat Moon?

Any thoughts people? Bleaney (talk) 16:06, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes to all, although I object to renaming Kat 'Pat' ;) GunGagdin^Moan 16:12, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

He he, just rectified that little mistake! Bleaney (talk) 16:47, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I definetly agree on Dot & Pat, not sure about Kat though... :/ MayhemMario 18:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree about Pat and Dot, but Kat's a more tricky one as I think she's more associated with the name Moon than Slater. But it's hard to be able to say that really. –anemoneprojectors– 15:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Kat Slater - It is a no brainer really... :)RaintheOne ^BAM 15:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Kat Slater and Kat Moon are both pretty equal on Google... though Slater has the edge. –anemoneprojectors– 15:44, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with all 3 changes D4nnyw14 (talk) 16:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep, yep, yep. The last one is the most borderline, but here's some stats: '"Kat Moon" EastEnders' pulls 143,000 GHits to Slater's 105,000, but only 201 GNews hits to Slater's 273. On TheFreeLibrary it's Moon 191 to Slater 183, but looking at Highbeam, Slater pulls 589 to Moon's 283. Frickative 11:33, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I've always called Kat by Moon since she got married. Very rarely call her Slater. Same with Pat. I agree with Dot though. But that's my personal opinion. GSorby – Ping! 11:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I think there is concensus here about changing Dot Branning to Cotton and Pat Evans to Pat Butcher, so could one of the admins do this please?? As for Kat, opinion is more mixed so I think we should talk it out a bit more. Bleaney (talk) 16:15, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Anyone?? Bleaney (talk) 16:53, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I know this is not a source or anything - but it could help you decide. When X-Factor contestant Amelia ended up in the bottom two, she was compared to Kat so many times that she trended - under the name of Kat Slater rather than Kat Moon. Not set in stone, but it gives a general idea that she is still well known as Slater.RaintheOne ^BAM 17:00, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I think at the current time, she is more known as Slater, though maybe in the future she may be most known by Moon, which means although I belive she should be moved to Slater for now, this discussion may pop up in the future. MayhemMario 18:40, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Shall we go ahead and move them all? I guess it's down to me, or 5 albert square, though she's inactive for the time being. Unless someone else has become an admin and I don't know about it! There's no hurry though. I can do it next week. –anemoneprojectors– 13:36, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Move them! Bleaney (talk) 14:59, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Still no moves - come on ;)Rain the 1 20:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Huh, that was a surprise. Turns out Kat didn't need an admin to shift her :) Frickative 03:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Just popping my view in, Kat's been a Moon for 7 years now, and was a slater for 4/5, so would people not know her better as Moon? Dontforgetthisone (talk) 03:04, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

She was off screen for the majority of those seven years. Only on-screen years count. –anemoneprojectors– 14:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

"Since" this date

Who thought it was a good idea to create a new date format soley for the occupation field? I do not get it. If a character has been doing a job from a certain date, why not just set it out like "2010—" ...

You are switching between dashes and text.. why don't we set all of them out like this: "Barmaid (from 2007 until 2010), Pub landlady (in 2010), Businesswoman (from 2010 until 2011), Salon manager (since 2011)"

I do not see why see haven't changed the duration fields "Duration Since 2007" ... Is any good reason for this change?RaintheOne ^BAM 14:33, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I prefer ' Barmaid (1995-98) Buisnnessman (2010-) for example, so I think I agree with Rain MayhemMario 16:12, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Sames. (2010—) looks better than (since 2010). But if the start date is unknown, or the date is unknown the it should say for example, until 2010. GSorby – Ping! 16:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad some people agree. Or leave the date out if we do not know the exact one, because it would be more helpful for the reader that way.RaintheOne ^BAM 22:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I also dislike the 'since' inclusion and dont get it either.GunGagdin^Moan 01:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Unless Wikipedia has changed, it's part of the manual of style to use "since" and "until". That's why we started doing it ages ago. –anemoneprojectors– 14:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Well it looks like the members of this prject aren't that sold on it AP.RaintheOne ^BAM 15:26, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Off it goes then! –anemoneprojectors– 15:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Then again, you can't argue with the MOS, can you?? –anemoneprojectors– 13:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank goodness somethings been done about that, I always hated the since approach. Dontforgetthisone (talk) 03:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Even though it's the correct one. –anemoneprojectors– 14:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)