Talk:List of Neighbours characters

Page Layout

Now that the "Former characters" have been merged with the "Regular former" characters, most of the recurring characters have been left out, other than the ones with their own pages. I am unsure about this as it leaves out many, many important guest and recurring characters of the soap over its 38 year history.

Personally, I thought there being separate sections for "Regular former" and "Recurring former" were quite handy, as the recurring tends to be quite longer and a distinction can be quite useful. Additionally, if we start to exclude recurring characters, there will be many arguments over who to include and exclude. On the UK soap pages, we include characters with their own sections (not just in the "Others" table) as it means they are significant or if they have been in 4 episodes or more. It can be sourced as a group project over time. I know there can be some disagreements, but the main point made at the AFD for the recurring and former pages was that it would be more useful to have one single list rather than 3 (I did not agree with this, but that does not matter at this moment), but now 95+% of the recurring and guest characters are gone, which is confusing. These lists were meant to be a guide for viewers where they could browse and search and then click on them if they had a section/page for more information. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Firstly, please do take any decision beyond the merger as a WP:BOLD one. I maintain, however, that the exhaustive list that was at List of recurring Neighbours characters needed extensive cutting, and copying significant portions of it over would have allowed the errors that littered that page to remain. Listing only characters with their own article gives a clear and unambiguous criteria, inextricably tied to their notability, which other/variable qualifications may not. I just don't see the purpose of archiving a character in the former characters section to guide readers to nowhere other than their presence in another list. I did have pause when it came to regular characters without their own articles (which meant these characters were removed), but ultimately felt consistency was the best option. If a reader feels that characters such as Maria Ramsay and Pierce Greyson should be listed here, and fair enough, then they should go ahead and write them an article! U-Mos (talk) 20:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Hey U-Mos. Congratulations on being bold enough to make the changes. It does not seem an easy task. As with the H&A list, I like it all in one list. Perhaps we could decide on the criteria for the list. It could be as simple as including any confirmed regular character with a source and any recurring character that has an article written about them. Maria Ramsay, Pierce Greyson, Susan Cole etc, which were already sourced, could be added back? You stated you removed them for consistency, but any regular character and significant recurring character still feels consistent. Those instances guide general readers to list entries and they can read more Wikipedia content. That is the same purpose as clicking the link to the stand alone article.Rain the 1 22:11, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Good job, U-Mos! In my opinion, I think the criteria for it should be: all regular characters added and all recurring characters that have their own article added as well. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

That seems reasonable and manageable - I've re-added all regular characters to the list now. U-Mos (talk) 23:13, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

It is great to have a positive outcome. The merge is completed and we have a criteria for inclusion. I like this new vibe of working together for the better - we are all being productive and creating content.Rain the 1 23:29, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Krista Sinclair

I don't get it. I added a source for this character and it was deleted. I then removed the character from the list and she has been returned with the "citation needed" box next to her. But I added a citation, therefore following Wikipedia's rules. What's happening to this page?150.143.113.199 (talk) 21:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

@150.143.113.199 Sorry if my edit summaries weren't clear. The source you added was not sufficient, as it was merely a discussion of the storyline prior to Krista's arrival. It neither confirms she would be introduced, or reports on her casting. As the character was stealth introduced as part of a week with a lot more to grab headlines, I haven't seen anything online reporting Majella Davis joining the cast yet. Feel free to use Template:cite episode to add a primary source for the time being if you have the time. I'm not sure why you felt the need to remove the entry, as there's no disputing its accuracy and it's only a matter of time before a good web source is available. U-Mos (talk) 08:03, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry. I only removed it to draw attention to the issue. I knew it would be put back. It looks like a source has been found now so it doesn't matter anymore. I just cut and picked the sources on the character page. I didn't realize what they were as I thought if they were good enough to be used on the character's page, they would be good enough for the main page too. My mistake. But it has been sorted now anyway as a source has been added. Once more, apologies for any inconvenience.150.143.113.199 (talk) 16:35, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Melanie what?!

Just a note here to acknowledge that Melanie is currently being credited as Melanie Pearce, not Pearson, and it appears not to be a mistake as it's been the case for multiple episodes and in Amazon's X-ray feature. But I think we don't do anything until matters become clear on screen. U-Mos (talk) 08:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

More than likely just a production error, but I pretty big one to say the least! - Therealscorp1an (talk) 22:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Mischa

Since there seems to be a bit of an issue with Krista and Reece being regulars or not, I wanted to start a discussion here. The sources have started that Reece is a limited time role (or at least from what I saw in the ones about her introduction), so I do not know about her role in the credits. I think keeping Reece in recurring for now would be a good idea until a source says otherwise, but I thought I would open this up now to see what people think. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 22:33, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

See the "Melanie and Reece" section above - the closing credits make a clear distinction between main and guest cast, and Barton remains credited as a guest. Krista is credited as part of the regular cast from her first appearance (I wonder if she might not be dead!). U-Mos (talk) 22:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Exactly. Krista is listed as a regular in the end credits and Reece is not. I was surprised by how much background scenes they included introducing Krista. I was less surprised when I saw she was credited as a regular and it became clear she may not have died. Then we saw Eden alone, having supposedly moved and disposed of her body in ten minutes from the top of Lassiters?!Rain the 1 23:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Recurring cast

On the closing credits Abigail Tanaka And Isla Tanaka-Brennan are always listed separately from the main cast names and are always listed next to guest/recurring cast like Chelsea or Eden which would mean these 2 characters are recurring cast not main so they need to ideally be moved from main list to the recurring list of cast. present

}92.232.179.45 (talk) 15:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)