# Talk:Betty Turpin

That she has been a high profile charcter in one of the most widely-viewed soaps for 38 years is surely sufficient evidence of notability. Ground Zero | t 22:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

As this character wasn't major when she had more onscreen time, and is currently seen little, I feel it should be merged with the reccuring and minor Corrie characters article.This is Drew (talk) 11:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Hm, i do see your point that she is - well - these days shes minor - and she is certainly recurring but she was before the 2000s a regular character. Although the article is neither very notable so I mostly agree. 86.143.121.28 17:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I dont agree with this merge. Next year, the character is going to have been on-screen for 40 years! There is a lot that can be done to improve this page.GunGagdinMoan 13:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the merge, sorry Gungadin. Article has to be merged to the List until it establishes notability by third party sources and given appropriate references. This ia what WP:FICTION writes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

It wasnt merged into an appropriate place. She is not a minor character and she isnt recurring as she's been a regular for nearly 40 years, which is one of the longest running UK soap opera characters of all time. If an appropriate place to merge is formed then so be it; however, I would say that all but about 10 Coronation Street character pages meet your criteria for merging at present. Potential needs to be taken into account with some of these pages.GunGagdinMoan 23:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree - I'd say that it's absolute nonsense to suggest that a household name of a character like Betty isn't notable. Common sense dictates that the article needs improving, not merging away into a list when there are dozens of articles for characters that have been around for nearly four decades less that no-one raises an eyebrow to. Really now. Even outside of Coronation Street, how many fictional characters have ever had a line of real-life food products launched in their honour? [1] Frickative 00:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Totally agree with the above. Betty's Hotpots are very well known in the UK. A character that has appeared for 40 years - for many of those as a regular - is clearly notable.--UpDown (talk) 10:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Loving how you've improved this already, Frickative.GunGagdinMoan 12:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Betty Williams (Coronation Street)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Matthewedwards :  Chat   22:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I'll be reviewing this article against the Good article criteria. I have already checked it against the "quick fail criteria", and it passes that, so I will now begin the "review proper". This may take me up to two days, so please be patient :)
I will be back soon with a complete review. All the best, Matthewedwards :  Chat   22:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
The prose is pretty good, but I found a few things that didn't sit right with me, and a couple of MOS infractions:
"in the UK television soap opera Coronation Street." The MOS says you should use "United Kingdom" instead of "UK" the first time. The thing is, it makes the sentence a bit long winded. Perhaps "British" would work better?
When Driver auditioned for Hilda Ogden, that character wasn't iconic, so I'm not sure it's a good idea to say that.
"The character first arrived in Coronation Street to help her sister Maggie Clegg run the corner shop" Using "first" makes it sound like the character left, and then rejoined the soap, but the rest of the article gives no indication that that happened.
Perhaps wikilink to hotpot and meat pie or other suitable articles for those not familiar with such foods.
"Betty Driver, who had been performing since she was 8 years old, retired in the 1960s and worked in hotels in Cheshire." Do you have an age for when she retired? Also, how did she retire and work in hotels? I think it probably means that she worked in hotels after retiring from performing, but it's not clear.
"Hilda Ogden - just think" per MOS:DASH, either the hyphen should be a spaced en-dash or unspaced em-dash
"insofar" is a tad informal. Is there any other phrase that could be used instead that would better match the WP:TONE of an encyclopedia?
"However, Little notes that" -- in this instance, "however" is being used as a conjunction, joining the information in one sentence with that in the second. Instead of a full stop, a semi-colon should be in place, like: 'blah, blah, blah; however, yadda yadda yadda.
The first mention of Cyril is in the sentence "Cyril frequently protests when Betty attempts to diet". I had to break from where I was reading and scan the rest of the article to see if it mentioned who Cyril was. Perhaps consider switching around the order of the sub-sections and having Backstory first, Storylines second, and Personality third, so it makes a bit more sense?
"She'll be here for a long time to come — she'll just be on the other side of the bar for a change".[4] In a storyline that aired in February 2010, Betty - at 90 years old - was named Manchester's Oldest Barmaid." -- again, follow WP:DASH on the correct usage, which is spaced en-dashes or unspaced em-dashes, even in quotes where the source may have used a different style.
"ITV describe Betty as a "lynchpin" of the soap opera" -- this is the first mention of ITV, and it isn't Wikilinked. Perhaps mention somewhere that ITV is the broadcaster of Corrie?
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
The references that are in the article are good, but the entire Storylines section is uncited. Is there any way you might be able to use {{cite video}} to cite the episodes in which the events mentioned occur? I have no doubt that it's all true, and I'm aware that we can use episodes as primary sources, but it would be nice to have them as reference points if at all possible.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Has the actress been sick and absent from the soap for any prolonged period of time? I vaguely recall something, but in all honesty it might be that other old woman in the electric wheelchair who used to annoy Fred Elliott that I'm thinking of.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
No issues here
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Nothing of note
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free  images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
The images do not appear to meet WP:NFCC#8 (the hotpot one is better, though). A couple of good articles that meet NFCC for reference are The Stolen Earth, and Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation).
Overall:
Pretty good. The prose shouldn't be too difficult to get sorted out. My main concerns with this article are the image rationales and references to episodes for storylines. I'll put the nomination on hold so that the article editors have a chance to rectify the issues raised. Good luck! Matthewedwards :  Chat   07:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Pass/Fail: 

Hi, thank you very much for the helpful review. I've been through point by point, and hope I've satisfied all your concerns.

Prose

That first sentence was definitely long-winded. I've changed it to '...is a long-standing fictional character from the British soap opera Coronation Street, portrayed by former music hall star Betty Driver.'
You're right, I've cut the 'iconic character'
I've dropped the 'first'. I think it's because I'm used to starting off storyline sections with 'So and so first appears' or 'So and so is first seen', but in this context it is misleading.
I've added a piped link to Lancashire hotpot, and because it was linked in the next line down, I've removed that link.
The source doesn't mention at what age she retired, it just places it between working on Pardon the Expression and joining Coronation Street in 1969. Given that the former ran from 1965-1966, and she was born in 1920, I've changed it to read "in her late forties", but can't be more specific than that. I've clarified the rest of the sentence by changing it to: "retired from acting in her late-forties to run hotels in Cheshire."
I've changed it to a spaced en dash, as it's spaced in the article referenced.
I've changed 'insofar as' to just 'as'.
Thank you, I've never had a good grasp of semi-colons, but I've changed it now.
Done - you're right, ordering it this way definitely gives more context to the reader.
Changed to spaced en dashes.
Oops! I usually mention broadcaster in the lead, so I've gone back up and changed it to '...from the British ITV soap opera...'
Storylines

I believe my thinking is much like yours on this matter - I know that WP:MOSTV says that plot summaries don't normally require citations, but I usually try and use {{cite episode}} to pinpoint specific reference points for verification. In this instance, however, given that Coronation Street spans over 7,000 episodes, I honestly have no idea which specific episodes these things happened in. That said, when I wrote the plot summary, I did it with the aid of Daran Little's book The Women of Coronation Street. The book covers everything up to Betty moving to Wimbledon and being convinced to move home by Emily, so I've added a reference to the book after that. For the more recent storylines, I've added in references to online sources which verify everything since the publication of the book.
Coverage

To the best of my knowledge she hasn't. I can't think of who you mean wrt Fred Elliot, but in recent times Maggie Jones and Barbara Knox have taken extended absences due to illness, so perhaps that's it?
Images

I've re-written the fair-use rationales for each of the images, focusing particularly on strengthening the 'purpose of use' and 'replaceable?' sections to comply with NFCC#8, and I hope they're now sufficient.
I hope that covers the majority of your concerns, and look forward to hearing back from you. Thanks again for your review! Frickative 17:08, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Great work! I've decided to pass the nomination, and list the article at WP:GA. Well done! Matthewedwards :  Chat   21:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Pass/Fail: 

Rynewell91 (talk · contribs) uploaded a different picture, here.
I have reverted to the older one, because a) I think that it is a much clearer picture, and b) the other is only slightly newer.
If you disagree, please discuss it below. Thanks,   Chzz  ►  07:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Sorry, but the 'newer' version had to be removed, as it was a non-free image not in use.  Chzz  ►  07:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

On ITV on Tues 1 Feb at 8pm. Should be some good stuff for the article, and there are features in a lot of this week's TV magazines as well. If anyone regularly buys the TV Times (I think that was the one, might have been TV Guide!) there's a double page spread with an interview that might yield some useful quotes. Frickative 19:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll certainly keep an eye out and see if it's in the issue on sale now.RAIN*the*ONE BAM 20:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I looked at the Radio Times, they have her saying about three lines... not really any use, but TV Times did have a full interview so I brought it. =)RAIN*the*ONE BAM 22:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Excellent! I'm not sure whether or not this article could ever be a viable FA candidate, but it certainly can't hurt to take advantage of the increased publicity the documentary is stirring up :) Frickative 14:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
[2] interview hereGunGagdinMoan 14:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Jaci Stephen comments on the hotpot - [3]RAIN*the*ONE BAM 21:07, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Not being a viewer I don't know the answer, but this article is very unclear on the character's last appearance in the show. I would assume she was written out temporarily for some reason in May, which has now become permanent due to Driver's death. Was this for health reasons? Did a storyline cover it or did she just vanish? This needs to be covered in the article, as it is very notable by its absence currently. U-Mos (talk) 19:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware she wasn't even written out temporarily, the actress has died and the character is being killed off because the actress has died. This leaves us with a discussion point as technically, until Betty dies this year, her character is still officially there, even if never present onscreen. Obviously the last appearance refers to the character's last appearance, but does the duration end with the character's last appearance, or when the character officially left the street? If it's the former then Betty's duration ended in 2011, if it's the latter then it ended in 2012, so a consensus needs to be reached (if one hasn't already been reached elsewhere). Burbridge92 (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Her duration ends when she last appeared, which according to the article was May last year. This means that prior to the actress' death the character was absent for five months (and a bit longer in terms of filming dates), a long time by any standards. Even if her last episode was just an ordinary appearance, there are still things that need to be covered, ie. What her last appearance was, if there has been any explanation for her absence thereafter (which will have been almost a year by the time of her screen funeral), if she has continued to be mentioned on-screen. And if known, whether her role was more part-time in later years, and why she did not appear for so long before her death. Currently there is no mention of any storylines past February 2010, over a year prior to her last appearance. U-Mos (talk) 17:18, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I'm confused about something else. Her last appearance was in May, but her duration says until 2012, and the list of characters says she's due to depart. Does this mean she will appear on screen again? I highly doubt this, therefore she cannot be a departing character, right? –anemoneprojectors– 14:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I know. I'm annoyed about this. How they keep saying she's leaving. She's not. The actress passed away. So therefore, she's left.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boushenheiser (talk • contribs) 20:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Betty Williams (Coronation Street). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20130114072307/http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/entertainment/film_and_tv/s/218/218844_bettys_journey_from_hotchpotch_to_hotpot.html to http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/entertainment/film_and_tv/s/218/218844_bettys_journey_from_hotchpotch_to_hotpot.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Betty Williams (Coronation Street). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.itv.com/Soaps/coronationstreet/galleries/Picturespecials/Roversbarmaids/default.html?ModuleId=146628&ImageIndex=6&XPos=0&YPos=344&ThumbScrollPos=48
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081207082902/http://www.itv.com/Soaps/coronationstreet/castandcharacters/qtoz/BettyWilliams.html to http://www.itv.com/Soaps/coronationstreet/castandcharacters/qtoz/BettyWilliams.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904001800/http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/1995/11/22/863571.html to http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/1995/11/22/863571.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080929124801/http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/1995/11/22/863556.html to http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/1995/11/22/863556.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:09, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

"[In 1974] the truth about her illegitimate son is revealed, and when the community discovers this, Betty finds it difficult to face them.[9] She busies herself by taking in lodgers, and acquiring a ginger cat named Marmaduke for extra companionship"
Given that (as the infobox states and the narrative of the article confirms) Betty was working throughout this period behind the bar at the Rovers, to say she "finds it difficult to face [the community]" is spectacularly unconvincing; nor would she have any need to "busy" herself. The only part of any of this material to be supported by the citation given is the revelation about her son. I am removing everything between the word "revealed" and the acquisition of Marmalade. Harfarhs (talk) 00:51, 11 July 2021 (UTC)