Wikipedia talk:WikiProject EastEnders/Archive 7

message: *Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Storylines of EastEnders (2000s) (Eastenders storylines nomination) Keep
*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Who Shot Phil? (2nd nomination) Keep
*Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EastEnders off set episodes No Consensus
--Phirazo 19:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Woo! — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 21:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yawn!!! yet again... (Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 23) Gungadin 23:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the point of AFD if this happens anyway? Plus nobody is informed of deletion reviews. Anyway I'm honestly not that bothered because storylines are mentioned in characters' pages anyway. — AnemoneProjectors (I can't help it if I've got a natural curl to my hair!) 17:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeh, I was gonna suggest that we should scrap the storylines actually. I'm tired of fighting for them. It's also going to be tons of work to rewrite and I just dont have the time to do it at the moment. Do you think we should just redirect to History article even if it's kept? I think it will continue to be put up for deletion even if I rewrite them. The same people will get involved, and we will get criticised for using BBC sources etc and repeating information. I would prefer to work on the character articles to be honest, adding the information there. We can always add a brief paragraph on each decade to the history article. Talk about writers, execs, impact and the general style of the programme at the time. Like EE was said to be "gritty" and realistic during the 80s, and more sensational during the 90s, and criticised heavily during the 00s etc.Gungadin 17:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a really good idea to me. — AnemoneProjectors (I can't help it if I've got a natural curl to my hair!) 19:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All closed as "do nothing" this morning Stephenb (Talk) 08:08, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion Debates 

message: As we decided not to have navigational templates with three or less names on the top row, should we keep  and  or delete them? — AnemoneProjectors (?) 22:48, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just went a little crazy there. Even though it's probably a little too late, I don't see any harm in a minimum of three people on the top line (no less)... However, I'll understand if these look a little of place and you want them gone.   Conquistador2k6 (?) 1:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I don't think we should delete them now that you've made them, and I don't think there are any more to be made. So let's leave it at that. Other navigational template ideas are welcome though. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 18:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navigational templates 

message: I've just made some redirects so we can link to places easier the same as we do with minor characters - these are Beale's Plaice, Minute Mart and Booty (EastEnders). We already have The Arches (EastEnders), Walford High School and Walford Primary School. Should we make more, like redirects for the addresses? Would mean we could use 45 Albert Square instead of 45 Albert Square. What does everyone think? — AnemoneProjectors (?) 18:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a good idea Gungadin 19:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we categorise them as EastEnders locations? — AnemoneProjectors (?) 19:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeh, it's not worth making a new cat. Gungadin 23:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I meant is it worth categorising them at all? — AnemoneProjectors (?) 08:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so... -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I shall do it. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 14:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirects 

message: I think that the Family section on character pages (eg here) look slightly messy. Maybe we could make a template for this?--Thelb4 07:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're fine. What kind of template do you suggest? -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 08:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there's any need for a template. Would it look any different? What I did think though was should we link to the family section in the infobox as has been done on Pauline Fowler? — AnemoneProjectors (?) 10:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I've changed the Pauline article back so it lists her family in the family field, per the WPEE guidelines of which family should be listed there. I thought it looked crap - if we're just gonna link to another part of the article, what's the point of that field in the infobox? Also, it wouldn't work on the minor charatcer pages, cos there are multiple sections called "Family"... -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the idea of a template because it can be hidden. I've noticed recently a lot of objections to lists in articles (not just EE ones), so a template could be a way around that problem. Shall we just get rid of the family field from the infobox? I don't think it's necessary to list it there as well as in its own section.Gungadin 12:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then we should probably get rid of the family part of the infobox.  To be honest I've never really liked it, it often looks untidy, and everyone with a family has a family section, so best to just use that. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 14:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol, ok, if you get rid of it, you can delete it from every infobox then! How would we do a template? Wouldn't it be outrageously complex? What are the suggestions for the layout of it, etc...? -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 15:20, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we delete it from the infobox template, the family won't show up in articles anyway so we can delete them at our leisure ;) Don't know about the template but I think the only difference would be it would say "|brother=Phil Mitchell" instead of "*Brother: Phil Mitchell" and would have additional text at either end so would involve more typing! — AnemoneProjectors (?) 16:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never felt there was much point in the family bit at the infobox, its just always been there really.  I suppose what it can be useful for is showing whos close family and who isn't, but its not essential. Sparhelda 13:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The family section shows who is close family because it tells you how they're related. The infobox doesn't even do that. Although other fictional character infoboxes tell you who is who, and includes everyone. We couldn't do that though as there's too many people in some families. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 16:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family sections on character pages 

message: Just thought I'd mention that one of our categories has been used as an example on Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects as a discussion was brought up about our categorising of redirects on the talk page there. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 22:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They also made a good point there that the category is an alphabetical listing of all characters so the articles can be in chronological order. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 22:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad to see they are allowing them to remain categorised. What are your thoughts about setting up a 'minor' sub-cat, like they suggested on the talk page? Gungadin 23:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I think keep it as it is, although it wouldn't bother me terribly if it was changed. If someone really wants it changed then I don't mind. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 08:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer it as it is, I think they should all stay in the same category. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorising redirects 

message: Hey, could someone reply to my questions here? Thanks. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 08:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't comment at the time because I didn't know the answer. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 09:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, what I really need is for Gungadin to say what year the picture's from, then we can work it out. :) -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 09:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Put a message on her user talk to get her attention :-P — AnemoneProjectors (?) 10:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, :P -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 10:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clare Butcher 

message: "Wikipedia kills Walford's Dot" -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 08:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, something I reverted made the news!  — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 17:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: God, it must have been a really slow news day if this is what the Sun is reporting on today :) Gungadin♦ 18:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bloody hell! 

message: I know we aren't meant to use this place as discussion for the program but it has to be asked, does anyone know who Ian's stalker was? I didn't recognise him, looked kind of new. Sparhelda 20:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Steven Beale, the page has been updated...  82.152.193.215  —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 22:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stalker

message: I've also asked this on the main Wikiproject:Soap operas page, but I thought this might be a better place to find people familiar with UK soaps.
I've noticed a couple of obvious hoax articles from this user here and here. From his talk page it looks like he's created some hoaxes before. He's also made numerous changes to other soap-related articles, so i wonder is someone who knows a bit about British soaps could have a look through his contributions and check whether he's added any more incorrect information. In particular this series of unexplained changes to The British Soap Awards looks like it needs checking - unfortunately my quick Google didn't bring up a reliable list to compare it to. Best, Iain99Balderdash and piffle 00:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly false information added to British soap articles by [[User:Non-gayboy]] 

message: Please see Talk:Paula Campbell (singer). Chubbles 18:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and created a disambiguation page. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 20:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: EastEnders is missing from the list of television shows with LGBT characters, which is surprising since it caused a record number of complaints when Colin kissed Barry on the forehead! And all the other controversial kisses and stuff. Would someone like to check it out and add some information? — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 20:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gungadin♦ 16:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's great. I love how it's the only section with references! — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 17:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didnt know whether to include refs, but I thought I was making claims that needed to be backed up. There's been some gay characters this year I might add to the list, like the one from Brighton and Peggy's decorator. What does that T stand for in LGBT. is it transvestite? Is a drag queen a transvestite, or are people only called transvestites if they live as women? Because I didnt know whether to include John Fisher (EastEnders) or not. Gungadin♦ 17:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The T is transgender. A transgendered person can be a transsexual, a transvestite, cross-dresser, drag queen and more besides: take a look at the transgender page if you really want to know! Is it worth mentioning Zoe and Kelly's kiss? — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 20:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: And I would include John Fisher. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 20:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I forgot about Kelly and Zoe's kiss.  I added something on that in the brooke kinsella article, which can be added. Should they be listed as LGBT characters? Gungadin♦ 13:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I don't think that kiss meant that either of them was bisexual. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 14:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of television shows with LGBT characters