Talk:Grant Mitchell (EastEnders)

message: Are there any known plans for Grant Mitchell to make another return to EastEnders? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexWilkes (talk • contribs) 
:NO! Please stop asking! — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Until they kill the character off or unless Kemp retired etc we must assume he can return at any moment and therefore is an is not a was, SqueakBox 20:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Until we hear any confirmation that he will return, we must assume he's not going to, and therefore he is a was not an is. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you feel characters who have not died but have left the show should be refered to in present tense, please can you take it up at WP:WPEE. It was decided about a year ago to refer to them in past tense. As I've said elsewhere, soap operas are different to shows like Desperate Housewives or Lost and I feel different rules should apply. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

text: What claim? I know it can be easily changed, that's why I suggested taking it up with the Wikiproject. But actually, I don't think it would be that easy as there as many characters who have left and not died. Grant's gone to Portugal, isn't that enough? Yes he could return, and when we find out that he will return, we'll change it to "is". Until then, it should say as "was". — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Cite that he's left? Do you watch EastEnders? He's not in the cast anymore! — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Trust me, he's left. The citation for that is the fact that he no longer appears on screen in the show. He made a 3 month return; and no more plans have been announced - therefore he is a past character, who no longer appears in the show. Trampikey (talk to me)(contribs) 01:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Then listen to the people who watch it and are virtually experts on the show; he's not in it anymore. Trampikey (talk to me)(contribs) 11:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is/was debate

message: What are everyones thoughts on the storyline section? Seems a little heavy on the 2005-2006 storylines to me. I was planning to extend the early stuff, but i'm not sure if that's wise now seeing as we just had to condense the Pauline one so much.Gungadin 17:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, God! Shh before we have to do any more work!! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 17:20, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops, you're gonna kill me, I just asked Elonka to take a look. lol . I wanted to get an outsiders opinion. Dont hate me :)Gungadin 17:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol, oh God, you're gonna hate Grant as much as you hate Pauline by the end of this! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 17:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I suppose. I really hope the peer review people don't rip Pauline to shreds (well, I suppose PRs never get done anyway) but the FA people might rip it to shreds... -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 17:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah that's what i'm dreading too. I think they will rip it to shreds to be honest, and they can be so patronising and picky too- like with the Lou one, which shouldnt have failed in my opinion. They can hardly say we have too much in the storyline section in that article.Gungadin 17:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yup, peer reviews and FA noms can be very stressful! But when you see an article that you've worked on, show up on the Wikipedia mainpage, trust me, it's all worth it.  :)  As for my specific comments on this article: Yes, you guessed it, I'd like to see the storyline section edited down.  And as a style thing, be careful about starting too many paragraphs with the character's first name.  Scanning down the left column of the article, there are too many paragraphs that start with the word, "Grant." I'd  also like to see the lead expanded, per WP:LEAD.  Like instead of "short stints," get the actual dates, if not in the lead, then at least in the infobox.  It's ironic that the article has more detail on the character's emotional state, then the actual real world dates of when he appeared. :)  Whenever writing an article lead, on any subject, be sure to put right up at the top of the article why this particular character or subject is important, in a real-world context.  With Pauline, it was obvious that she was a 22-year character.  But with Grant, spell it out?  What could you put in the lead that would make a non-fan say, "Okay, yes, this character is important enough to have an article."  A good lead will also be a very concise summary of the entire article.  Did you know that if you have MSN messenger, words in Instant Messages are linked to Wikipedia articles?  You can hover over key words in any message, and it'll list the top couple paragraphs of the Wikipedia article, as a definition for that term.  Think about what you'd like to appear, if someone hovered their mouse over the name "Grant Mitchell."  :) --Elonka 17:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Storyline section 

message: The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
*Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): don't.
*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Elonka 18:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Automated peer review

message: *EastEnders' hard man quits in £1m dealGungadin 22:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: In early January 2010 alot of people keep putting Grant is returning to Eastenders for its 25th birthday. Because this as not been confirmed can people "STOP" changeing this profile.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.133.87.22 (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen anyone add it, at least not recently. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unknown Return (2010) 

message: It was me who removed this as like Phil's it is inaccurate. The show was twice-weekly in the 1980s, meaning it's not possible that 1000+ episodes could've aired between February 1985 and February 1990. The 1000 episode aired in 1994 and was marked by Nigel and Debbie's wedding. This is referenced on both their pages I believe.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.214.210 (talk) 04:28, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I've reverted my revert. –anemoneprojectors– 20:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: First appearance episode number

message: ross kemp says he's got a third return hes back in june and back again later in in the year (skip to 5 mins) 
2A02:C7D:1FA4:F200:859:4167:B2E0:BC04 (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. anemoneprojectors 21:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2016 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Grant Mitchell (EastEnders). 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://web.archive.org/web/20070222121637/http://www.thecustard.tv/linksandlists/tvpolls.html to http://www.thecustard.tv/linksandlists/tvpolls.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Grant Mitchell (EastEnders). 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://web.archive.org/web/20061230211134/http://www-fms.stir.ac.uk/research/mvv/mvv_ch2.html to http://www-fms.stir.ac.uk/research/mvv/mvv_ch2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090126061234/http://www.020magazine.com/webs/02005/showArticle.cfm?id=441 to http://www.020magazine.com/webs/02005/showArticle.cfm?id=441
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Grant Mitchell (EastEnders). 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://web.archive.org/web/20070401110027/http://www.womenrepublic.co.uk/entertainment/ross_kemp/ to http://www.womenrepublic.co.uk/entertainment/ross_kemp/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:09, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified