Talk:The Queen Victoria

message: Oh that's a shame, the piccie was removed! I will try and find a screen shot of it. Gungadin 00:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: "Peggy was forced to sell the Vic, in early 2001, after Frank did a runner and left her penniless. Peggy was shocked when Sharon returned as the new co-owner of the pub, with business partner Steve Owen.
In 2002, Sharon sold her share back to the Mitchells"
So what happened to Steve Owen's share? Does Mel still own part of the Vic that she inherited when Steve died? Or did he sell it and it isn't mentioned in the article? -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 22:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He sold his half to Phil in 2001 when he was trying to raise funds to pay the ransom on Mel, who had been kidnapped by Dan. That was when Phil moved back in with Peggy and Jamie and lived with Sharon. It was reported in the press at the time that Barbara Windsor was not happy about relinquishing ownership of the Vic indefinitely. There were rumours about a feud between Letitia Dean and Windsor over who should get the pub, so they apparently allowed them both to have it. lol Gungadin 22:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that, I added it in! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 23:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Owen's share 

message: I'd like to see some consitency on how the pub is referred to in articles. I think the first mention should refer to it by "The Queen Victoria public house" so people are aware that it's a pub. After that, we should refer to it as The Queen Victoria, not The Vic or The Queen Vic. If we want to call it "The Vic" then we would need to explain in the first mention that it's referred to that way, so readers know what we're talking about. We shouldn't assume that everyone reading our articles watches the show. I've also seen it called "the Vic", but "The" should be uppercase as it's definitely part of the name. Any comments or suggestions? anemone│projectors 18:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer the second option, because it will be annoying and longwinded to type The Queen Victoria each time. Can't we have in brackets at the top (also known as The Vic, Queen Vic etc)? Gungadin♦ 19:15, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Like "The Queen Victoria public house (The Vic)"? I know it's mentioned here that it's also called The Queen Vic and The Vic but if we mention The Queen Victoria in an article, other than wondering if it's the actual queen, people may not realise that The Queen Victoria and The Vic are the same. I think I already did that on one article but I don't know what one or how I did it! anemone│projectors 19:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I get you now, you were referring to all EE articles, right? I thought you meant just in this one. I agree with you then, we should always say that it's a public house.Gungadin♦ 21:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah in all articles. If we're going to call it "The Queen Victoria public house" one time and then "The Vic" or "The Queen Vic" every other time, which we pretty much always do, we should say it's "The Queen Victoria public house (aka The Vic)" after the first mention in all articles. Either that or always call it The Queen Victoria (mentioning public house the first time). Maybe I should have brought it up at the project page instead of here. Do you agree with that? We can incorporate it into our "collaboration" of the "month" ;) anemone│projectors 01:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Are you sure you know what I'm talking about‽‽‽ anemone│projectors 19:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bit belated, sorry I didnt notice this earlier. Yes i'm sure I know what you mean now :) Gungadin♦ 14:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consitency 

message: Apparently there are five bedrooms. Peggy's, Phil's, Ben's, Roxy's and Ronnie's. anemone│projectors 19:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: 5!! plus a kitchen, living room and bathroom. That's more rooms than most houses have in London, and they only have a flat. Maybe they store peggy in the attic. Gungadin♦ 14:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I swear it changes all the time. The article says 3. I suppose if the upstairs is the same size as the pub then there's enough room for 8 rooms but the landing isn't big enough for all those doors. I think all the houses change shape, especially Pat's and the Slaters'. anemone│projectors 15:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you think the residents section is a bit excessive. I know I wrote it, but now I think it's a bit much. Shall we just do a table? residents, years, lodgers. Could that work do you think, or would it get too complicated? Gungadin♦ 15:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah it is a bit. Try a table and see how it looks :) anemone│projectors 16:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You know I'm not sure. Can you do the whole thing? Maybe we could just cut down the text instead? anemone│projectors 20:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of bedrooms 

message: I've changed a small section.  Phil cannot be a licensee of the Vic due to his criminal record, granted he does own part of it.  If you want a comparable situation look at Coronation Street, Steve owns the Rovers, Liz us the landlady due to Steve not being able to hold a licence.  This happened further back when Grant and Phil owned the Vic and Grant was married to Sharon, she became the licencee.  After all, how many times have we heard Peggy yell "Get outta my pub" Douglasnicol (talk) 12:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Landlords/Licensees

message: I used to drink in the Queen Vic in Ealing (Now Finnegan's Wake). It was claimed that some of the script writers used to drink here whilst working across the road at ealing studios, hence the choice of names.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.185.90 (talk) 19:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Name source

message: Queen Vic is 'most popular soap business' AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  OOU source 

message: Does anyone know when the Pub was acctually "built" and "founded", because it clearly can't be 1985, because the un-seen Gus and Flo Leonard were Landlord's in the 1950s, so I'm reckoning it's got to have been founded in the 1940s, may be even before that, so does anyone acctually know –217.23.166.158 (talk) 14:29, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fictional, so it didn't exist before 1985. But "in universe" nobody knows. AnemoneProjectors 18:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anyone know when The Vic, was originally founded?? 

message: Can we merge these two sections because they both relate to the story of the pub? AnemoneProjectors 19:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story and appearance/Landlords sections 

message: there should be a new pic with the covered up queen vic showing that it is being rebuilt.
Just to be realistic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.3.102 (talk) 03:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because the image in use at the moment is freely licensed.  We wouldn't normally replace a freely licensed image with a screenshot.  Besides the Queen Vic won't be in the stages of rebuild forever, if the spoilers I've read are true, I believe that the rebuild is due to be finished shortly before Xmas --5 albert square (talk) 06:16, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a suggestion... 

message: Is this entry solely used for people who only owned the pub and weren't landlords? That's the reason I keep removing Archie Mitchell, but I just wanted to be sure. It seems a tiny bit odd only listing a few owners when there have been others. AnemoneProjectors 00:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree. I think it may be just better to have a "Landlord/owner" section in the "Past" bit, and then keep the "Current" as is with a separate "Owner" listing if needs be. Most landlords are the owners. It's really only Phil that screws that up. TBH I don't recall Ian ever owning the Vic. The closest he got, I thought, was through Chrissie, but as that wasn't legal... I have a vague recollection of Wilmott-Brown owning it very briefly but not enough to warrant an own section imo. ✽ Juniper§ Liege (TALK) 14:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ian is there because he legally owned the Vic when he loaned all that money to Phil before Archie bought the loan from him. The Chrissie thing wasn't legal, but the Archie/Phil thing was. AnemoneProjectors 15:15, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Your going to have to help me on this, because I will admit I thought this whole period was utter rubbish and really wasn't paying attention. Surely though that still makes Phil the owner, or whomever Ian was loaning the money to. The bank isn't the owner of your house when you get a loan from them. If Ian was the owner, then what was Phil? They both can't "own" something using the same money, either one is or the other is surely? ✽ Juniper§ Liege (TALK) 21:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it wasn't me who said it, I just went along with it cos I don't know the law in that area and assumed whoever it was did know. Thought it was you actually lol AnemoneProjectors 21:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Owners 

message: ????  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.14.237 (talk) 23:23, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can only presume that your series of question marks means you think the picture should be updated. It's not possible because the one we have is released under a free licence and any replacement would be non-free. So until someone visits the set, photographs the new-look pub and releases the image under a free licence, the one we have will stay. AnemoneProjectors 23:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NEW PIC 

message: Can we sort this out please? Phil is the landlord and Kat and Alfie are the licensees, correct? Or does being licensee allow them to be called landlords? Are they refered to as landlords in the programme? AnemoneProjectors 18:32, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Alfie and Kat are commonly referred to as Landlord/lady; Kat is called landlady very often.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.168.159.107 (talk) 09:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The website also calls them landlord/lady. I'm happy to go with that –AnemoneProjectors– 09:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phil, Kat and Alfie 

message: Mo promoted Julie Perkins last week, though it wasn't long term, and she just seems to have more authority than the other bartenders, and she is also a resident of the pub now. Would she be classed as a manager?
:Only if it's mentioned that she is. Basically, Kat and Alfie weren't around so Mo took charge and asked Julie to work behind the bar. She didn't really promote her, she just used that word. Someone had to do something, so Mo did. Doesn't mean she's a manager. She hasn't been called one. –AnemoneProjectors– 18:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mo Harris manager? 

message: *Best pub on telly - JuneGloom  Talk 14:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: "This is later changed to a green and cream colour scheme only for Grant Mitchell (Ross Kemp) to set fire to the Queen Victoria,"
Was it necessary for the building to have a colour scheme of green and cream to have Grant Mitchell set the Queen Victoria ablaze? That would be an interesting profile to develop and understand of a pyromaniac. Or could he do it without that colour scheme? Or was it that when Grant Marshall set it ablaze it had a green and cream colour scheme?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.88.72 (talk) 16:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pyromaniac Green and Cream ? 

message: "Instead, it was found that the source was the flat where Kat met her lover Derek Branning (Jamie Foreman)."
Kat was introduced to her lover Derek not at the flat but elsewhere so to say she "met" him there would imply that it was the place at which she was introduced to him rather than the flat at which their assignations occurred. "was meeting" is a clearer distinction.76.170.88.72 (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 18:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. Thank you! As I am responsible for the "met", I shall attend to it now. Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 21:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bed Bugs and Lovers 

message: Pauline wasn't just a cleaner, she worked there as a barmaid for a while.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.99.58 (talk) 18:44, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Pauline

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Queen Victoria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101201093732/http://walfordweb.co.uk/item.php?id=2633 to http://www.walfordweb.co.uk/item.php?id=2633
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Landlord and landlady does not imply barman or barmaid, because Shirley does not work behind the bar. A landlord is simply the owner or manager, not necessarily a bar worker, so I think it should be added. AnemoneProjectors 11:15, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Mick and Linda have "barman" and "barmaid" listed under "job role"? 

message: Up until now, we haven't included Fi as an employee due to the fact Grafton Hill employ her, not the Vic. But her role is almost identical to that of the Managing Supervisors. Wilmott-Brown was employed by the freeholder (Luxford and Copley) not the Vic, and Ronnie was employed by Phil in a role similar to Fi doing the books, so I suppose Fi should be listed as a managing supervisor. Tomski12 (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should clarify who was employed by the freeholder and who was employed by the Vic.  — ᴀnemoneᴘroᴊecтors 09:27, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

text: You're right, really. But it's all kind of changed now, she's not a business consultant or managing supervisor anymore. In fact she never really was, she was a con artist. I'll add Grafton to the table though. — ᴀnemoneᴘroᴊecтors 00:57, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

text: Well maybe we can put her as a past employee, I doubt people will join this discussion but you'd soon find out if someone disagrees when they remove her - if she's not removed then people will generally agree she belongs there. She did lie to gain the Carters' trust just so Weyland could take the Vic from them, so I'd call that a confidence trick. — ᴀnemoneᴘroᴊecтors 20:35, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fi's role 

message: I feel these need to be review, 'Karen Taylor attacking Phil for believing he killed Keanu' is hardly a key plot in the Vic or a moment in history....  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.179.254 (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key Events 

message: It’s a long shot I know but I have been thinking is there a possibility that years could be added to the sections that I added so for example all the people that have been owners or landlords of The Vic the years that they were owners etc could be added next to them for instance below is an example of what I mean the dates don’t need to be accurate I just think it would look good for the dates to be there as a reference what are peoples thoughts?  –85.255.236.150 (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Owners/Landlords