User talk:AnemoneProjectors/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions about User:AnemoneProjectors. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Happy New Year, AnemoneProjectors!

Happy New Year!

AnemoneProjectors,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 12:44, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you Davey2010, and the same to you! anemone projectors 13:01, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

AnemoneProjectors,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
5 albert square (talk) 14:36, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

And the very same to you, 5 albert square! anemone projectors 16:19, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

AnemoneProjectors,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Class455 (talk | stand clear of the doors!) 17:22, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

And of course, a very merry New Year to yourself, Class455! anemone projectors 17:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Pages moves

Hey, could you move User:JuneGloom07/Elly to Elly Conway and User:JuneGloom07/Raf to Raf di Lucca for me, please? - JuneGloom07 Talk 22:42, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I shall do it now and then to bed! anemone projectors 22:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I caught you just in time then! Thank you. - JuneGloom07 Talk 23:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Minsden Chapel

Hi. I have restored the December 2016 image on the above article over the 2010 version as the recent one more accurately shows the chapel as it is today. I have commented on this on the Talk Page. Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 17:52, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

I shall respond there. anemone projectors 17:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Roxy's death

Did Roxy die just of a heart attack as soon as she hit the water or did the heart attack make her lose consciousness and she drowned? I wanna go towards the latter because I thought she died like Whitney Houston did: both were drunk/high. Both entered into a body of water which was an extreme temperature change and that shocked their systems into unconsciousness. Arjoccolenty (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

@Arjoccolenty: From what I saw last week, Jack was told that the results of the coroner's report said that Roxy had a heart attack in the water and Ronnie drowed. That's all that was said, nothing about Roxy drowning, unless anything else has happened this week that I haven't seen yet. anemone projectors 01:09, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

What confuses me is that the coroner just said she had a heart attack. Not if it was fatal or nothing. We probably won't ever get an exact answer, but couldn't it be that the heart attack caused her to lose consciousness and drown? Heart attacks don't always kill instantly. Arjoccolenty (talk) 08:44, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

@Arjoccolenty: But the coroner establishes the cause of death so if all that was said was "heart attack in the water" then that's all we can say. If she had drowned, that would have been in the report. anemone projectors 08:59, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Actually I rewatched it. All the coroner said was that she had a heart attack. Not if it was fatal or anything. So it could go either way. Arjoccolenty (talk) 17:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

But if her cause of death had been drowning, I believe the coroner would have said that she had drowned - there would have been evidence of drowning. anemone projectors 04:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Christmas ratings for List of EastEnders episodes (2016)

Hello there. Firstly, I just wanted to say I think your list of EastEnders articles are wonderful, you have done a really good job on them, well done. I hope you don't mind me editing and updating the ratings for the Christmas 2016 episodes. After I had updated them I was unsure if you were considering adding the BBC iPlayer viewers to the 28-day data from BARB as well. If you were to add the BBC iPlayer ratings to the current 28-day ratings for Christmas 2016, the ratings actually increase considerably, especially for the Christmas day episode! This is what the ratings would look like if you added the iPlayer viewers to the current ratings:

19 December: 6.33 million
20 December: 8.02 million
22 December: 7.57 million
23 December: 7.33 million
24 December: 7.44 million
25 December: 9.18 million

Not sure what you think about updating the ratings to include the iPlayer viewers as I know iPlayer viewer counts are not always available and so it may seem a little unordinary for the ratings to increase so much for that week, but I just thought I would see what you think. Again, hope you didn't mind me editing your article. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 15:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

BBC iPlayer is included in the 28-day data (I don't know if there is any other way to watch EastEnders after it's been broadcast on TV), so no need. Thanks though :-) I update the ratings when I remember which is usually once a week though sometimes I check too early and the next week I might forget. But thanks. anemone projectors 02:35, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Moving page

Hi,

Do you think User:Grangehilllover/Louise Mitchell is alright to be moved into mainspace?

Thanks, Grangehilllover (talk) 23:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: Hmm, I thought there would have been more real-world information than that! Is there nothing about her storylines from a real-world perspective? anemone projectors 23:14, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Also while you're here, can I ask you to only create redirects for EastEnders characters if they are not in "others"? Generally those redirects won't be needed, ever. anemone projectors 23:18, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

There's things what Tilly said about Peggy's death and stuff when she joined in 2016. And sorry and OK about the redirects.

Grangehilllover (talk) 23:24, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry about it too much - the Travis one can stay as at least Louise's page links to it. But do you mind that I've deleted the others? I think the article could be moved into mainspace, though it could do with more if there is more. Are you ok to keep working on it a bit more, or would you prefer it to be moved? anemone projectors 23:28, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it's fine. I'll work on it a bit more. I found some stuff fromm last year when Shakil arrived and when Bex and Louise competed to be with him.

Thanks,

23:35, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, sorry to interupt. To add some feedback on the page, should it only be storylines mentioned in the development that are included in the lead or am I mistaken? Soaper1234 (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I've never really thought about that before. Not all storylines have development info though. anemone projectors 21:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The only reason I mentioned it is because I had seen other editors insist that storylines shouldn't just be listed in the lead without any mention on the page. I suppose I was more referencing to the "the deaths of Peggy and her cousins Ronnie (Samantha Womack) and Roxy Mitchell (Rita Simons) and developing a crush on Travis Law-Hughes (Alex James-Phelps)" and "blackmailing Abi Branning (Lorna Fitzgerald) over her fake pregnancy" that weren't really notable storylines for Louise in her recent time on the show. I mean, I'd understand a mention for them if they were included through development, but otherwise they seem quite small? Sorry, that was a bit lengthy but I hope it makes sense? Soaper1234 (talk) 22:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: You know I think I agree there. I think the Travis thing is too recent to know how notable it will become, though the relationship with Keegan may be more notable as it's all about him winding her up. The Abi thing was a bit minor, and the deaths isn't a Louise storyline, it's a Ronnie/Roxy/Jack/Amy/Ricky story. Also I think the development section could be rewritten so it's about her personality, and her relationships with members of her family and other people. @Grangehilllover: pinging just in case you've not seen the latest replies. anemone projectors 22:32, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'm one of those editors that think storylines should be covered in the development section, before being added to the lead. If they're being talked about, then they're notable. Surely there is more info for Louise out there? Didn't the actress just do a big interview for DS? - JuneGloom07 Talk 22:43, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Do you know what - I just Googled "Tilly Keeper interview" and found loads of stuff to add from last year. I've also seen a lot from her regarding next week's "Disaster Week" but I haven't really read those things yet. anemone projectors 22:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we should all try to collaborate. Except after today I'll be really busy all week and away next weekend, then busy the week after, so I might not be much more help for a while! anemone projectors 22:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I've made some changes - I've added more in development and changed the lead slightly too. Thanks for your help and advice, too.

Grangehilllover (talk) 23:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I reckon there's more reception info out there, so I'll check the soap mags (that I've got out at the moment) and HighBeam. - JuneGloom07 Talk 00:02, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind collabroating on the project either. I'll try and find some characteristics/personality and development for the character. Soaper1234 (talk) 15:51, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't think I have the time to collaborate on the page, but I did scan some Inside Soap articles from the mags I already had out – [1]. You don't have to use the 2001 article btw, I just threw that in there. I haven't been able to find any reception yet though. - JuneGloom07 Talk 20:12, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I did consider rearranging the later development section into characterisation and relationships but there was too little information to try to make it work. Some of the first things I saw when I googled were "treacherous", "scheming" and "vulnerable side", so there should be plenty out there - even if it's an opinion I'd put it in characterisation rather than reception. The thing I do is to literally exhaust every available source for even a single word that can be added. A bit like this (and yes I'm still claiming that article isn't ready yet as I still have sources to add!) anemone projectors 01:20, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi all, I've started to develop the 2001-2010 section of the character development and remembered that there was the storyline between Louise and Ben where he burnt her. I was wondering, JuneGloom07, if you had any Inside Soap articles that referenced Louise at all from 2010? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 10:02, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I looked the other day and I don't. I only started collecting Inside Soap regularly from mid/late 2010. - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I know this is the Daily Star, but there's some good reception and storyline development here [2] - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Ah, right - thanks anyway JuneGloom07. That Daily Star article is quite brilliant actually, thank you :) Soaper1234 (talk) 10:54, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Merge

Would it be possible to merge User:JuneGloom07/Hidden Figures with List of accolades received by Hidden Figures? - JuneGloom07 Talk 17:31, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, well, I might as well move your version over the top of the other, leaving that history deleted as merging would leave strange diffs because you started your draft before the article was created. But yes. anemone projectors 01:45, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry if that was a hassle. I almost moved the article the other day, but then I talked myself out of it. - JuneGloom07 Talk 03:22, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

You should have done! I supposed I should do Gavin myself as someone copy/pasted my userspace with absolutely no attribution or history! So I just reverted it. anemone projectors 10:08, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I only hesitated because it had half the award nominations of the other films its competing against. Userspace thieves are the absolute worst! Glad to see Gavin is in the mainspace with a full history! - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:54, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

But can I be bothered to go for DYK? anemone projectors 09:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes! Get your first one of 2017. - JuneGloom07 Talk 16:21, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, I referenced something in the lead specifically for DYK so I might as well! anemone projectors 01:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Re:Admin anniversary

Just as a heads up, I wanted to let you know I undid your inclusion of your name on the February 11 page because we already have you listed for February 10, as per Special:UserRights/AnemoneProjectors. Lepricavark (talk) 01:19, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

You're right, I thought it was 11 Feb all this time. Thanks. anemone projectors 09:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Steve Hewlett and Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist)

As you were involved in Steve Hewlett (ventriloquist) you may be interested in Talk:Steve_Hewlett_(journalist)#Requested_move_7_February_2017 (and probably won't have either of the pages concerned on your watchlist). PamD 22:47, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Adoptive relative inclusion in infobox

Hi,

I don't know if you've seen tonight's episode, so sorry if this ruins it. Well, with Kim and Denise finding out they're not biological sisters, they're kids (Libby, Chelsea and Pearl) are removed. As well as each other.

However, when characters get married, we always go by their common name and if a marriage occured off screen, we go (until 2012), (off screen) etc, as we maintain it's fiction. For the lenght they've been on, we've believed they are sisters and then it's immediately changed because of a single scene.

Would it really be do bad if adoptive relatives were not noted? I don't mean going stupid by saying adoptive-step-great-aunt or like that. But grandparents, aunts/uncles, cousins etc. I doubt Denise and Kim will become strangers and Pearl and Libby have known Denise and Kim as their respective aunts for years. Sometimes, adoptive relatives of a character play more of a role in storylines than biological relatives. Maybe if they were noted in other relatives?

Thanks, Grangehilllover (talk) 21:06, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I haven't seen it but I'm guessing it means one of them isn't Emerald's daughter (don't tell me which one, at least keep that as a surprise until I see it, possibly not until Saturday!) I think I'll need to watch it to understand, as I also avoid checking the articles before I've seen the episodes. I'm kind of hoping Kim is the one who was adopted. P.S. don't worry about it as you weren't to know and chances are I'd have seen something about it in the morning anyway. If I hadn't been working tonight, I wouldn't have checked my emails until tomorrow morning after seeing the episode, but because I'm working 4 nights this week I'm unlikely to see Monday's until Saturday (due to not having enough time) then I'll have to try to catch up on the rest over the weekend, though this weekend is pretty action packed for me so I might end up not seeing the episodes within seven days of the broadcast :(

I usually update User:AnemoneProjectors/List of EastEnders episodes (2017) with a short episode synopsis as soon as I've seen an epiosde, so if you want to be sure, you could check there to see if I've written anything, and if not, assume I haven't seen it! (Thankfully other people don't update this on my behalf!)

Anyway, wouldn't they be listed as adoptive siblings now? Keep all the same family members, just add "(adoptive)"? As they're just as relevant as they always were? anemone projectors 02:19, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

And the thing is, I think with them not being best buddies with each other, it could just be away for them to talk.

Someone's removed them from each others, so i'll add them back and we should see how it unfolds. In a realistic sense, there could've been no way Emerald could've brought her daughter up without legal rights.

Thanks,

Grangehilllover (talk) 19:19, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you don't mind me adding to this. In the episode Emerald never explicitly stated that she adopted Denise so there's no proof of a legal adoption.

And about the adoptive extended relatives being included, this should mean that the likes of Bobby Beale should have Linda Clarke listed and Whitney Dean should have Carol, Sonia etc. listed on hers. SamLaws81101 (talk) 21:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

But on the flip side, she might have. She might have not. We actually have no clue.

And with adoptive relatives, I don't mean list every single person. Just ones where a relationship was established. So like, Whitney, she is/was more of a friend to Bianca's cousins Lauren and Lucy etc. However, it wasn't long ago, at Peggy's funeral, she said "it reminded me of my Nana Pat". I think it should really depend on the closeness and interaction, like we do anyway. Maybe if they were listed in "other relatives" or other parameters were devised.

Thanks,

Grangehilllover (talk) 22:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh well, so much for "don't tell me which one, at least keep that as a surprise until I see it, possibly not until Saturday!" Anyway I don't think we should change our rule on adoptive relatives in the infobox, but we could make a single exception to whichever one of Emerald's daughters she adopted if we have consensus to do so. Discussion should really be on the character's talk page, not on the user talk page of someone who didn't really want spoilers. anemone projectors 00:13, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

P.S Don't worry about it really. I would have found out anyway. By watching. I'll just pretend to be surprised :-) I almost watched it before I went to work but I ran out of time. If only I had woken up earlier! anemone projectors 00:28, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

Oops! I'm sure it was all accidental In that case, should I start a conversation on Denise, Kim and/or 2017 characters for others? Sorry if I'm annying you doing this :)

Thanks,

Grangehilllover (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

It wasn't you, so don't worry. I would take it up on Denise's talk page. But if there's no proof of a legal adoption then we probably can't list anyone as adoptive. I need to watch the episode! Maybe I'll find time today. anemone projectors 09:53, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

The conversation is now here: Talk:Denise Fox#Including Emerald, Kim etc. on Denise's page.

Thanks,

Grangehilllover (talk) 11:08, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

On this day, 10 years ago!

Wishing AnemoneProjectors a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 01:12, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

EE: Roxy's death

THIS is what they said at the inquest.

“We have heard from Mr. Wright, the pathologist that Roxane Mitchell had cocaine in her body, but not at levels which would have proved fatal. Whilst I have no doubt that it contributed to her death, the prima facia cause of Roxanne Mitchell’s death was the cardiac arrest which RESULTED IN HER DROWNING.”

So why can't we put her cause of death as also drowning in the infobox on the EastEnders/List of births, marriages and deaths in EastEnders page? This was at the inquest. The argument is that they said if drowning played a part in her death, it would have been noted. Oh look, guess what they said at the end of the sentence. Honestly, its like people like to revert everything I do and accuse me of vandalism. Arjoccolenty (talk) 03:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I think we should because that's what was said at the inques - we should say she drowned following a cardiac arrest caused by cold shock response. anemone projectors 03:53, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Favour!

Hi AP, hope you're well! Could you possibly move the userpage User:Soaper1234/Lofty to Ben "Lofty" Chiltern please? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 17:51, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

I think that should be Lofty Chiltern, as Lofty is his WP:COMMONAME after all. - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:32, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with that also. Soaper1234 (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

I can, but I'm not well at all. anemone projectors 10:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh no! Hope you're feeling better soon! Thanks for your help :) Soaper1234 (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Remove protection?

Hey. Could you remove the semi-protection from User:JuneGloom07/Eye, so I can move it, please? - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:06, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Done! anemone projectors 18:44, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! - JuneGloom07 Talk 19:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

I had no idea this had happened to my draft! [3] Could you possibly move it to the main space (at Anna Bamford) without the vandalism/reverts appearing in the history? - JuneGloom07 Talk 22:02, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

I deleted the vandalism and reverts from the history - I did the move as well though you could have done it, at least it saves you requesting deletion of the redirect in your userspace. anemone projectors 09:56, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that! I better keep a close eye on the rest of my drafts now. - JuneGloom07 Talk 21:09, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Notes

What is the point of notes if we just abandon them Aacfsftw (talk) 15:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

We haven't just abandoned it. There is a discussion on the talk page and a consensus about Bobby Beale has been reached. You're free to join the discussion. anemone projectors 15:57, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for finishing off the stuff that needed doing by the way. As long as you're aware that though there was a consensus, consensus can change. I suppose we could have added to the note to say something like "however, there is a current discussion on the talk about about this". anemone projectors 16:09, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

hiya

Hi. Been a while since I bothered you with a page move. So can you please do a move on User:Raintheone/David to David Tanaka?Rain the 1 16:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

It is done. anemone projectors 07:22, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank ya. thanks. EDIT: Kittens made me lol.Rain the 1 09:36, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, they're cuter than cats :-) anemone projectors 10:17, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

lol! Kittens make me lol too! ;-) anemone projectors 16:10, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive editor

I don't know if the user has stopped if you get this, but this user [4] keeps adding character's addresses to infobox, despite me reverting the edits and leaving a message. Grangehilllover (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I also reverted and left a message. As they have carried on since being asked to stop, I've now left a warning (which you can also do, see WP:UWT). I shall be off to bed shortly but I'll keep an eye on their contribs until I do... anemone projectors 20:54, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Ollie Walters

He hadn't been removed from the present characters section but I realise that now you mention it Aacfsftw (talk) 13:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

(Note this is a response to User talk:Aacfsftw#Common sense.) anemone projectors 13:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Review

Hi AP, hope you are well. I have (finally) added everything to my Babe Smith draftspace that needs to be added. If you find a spare moment, could you look through the article and make any necessary changes. The main section I am concerned about is the reception section - is it too big? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 14:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I've just read a few little bits, and I notice there's no characterisation section, but her characterisation is split between "Casting and introduction" and "Reception". I would create a characterisation section and put the "no-nonsense, bustling busybody with a big heart" in there, plus the entire quote from the EE website reporter, and all the paragraph from "Badland described Babe" to "most fearsome Carter of all". Then I would move anything from reception to characterisation that describes the character like "devious", "spiteful", "scheming", "vindictive", "evil", "wicked", etc. If you like I'll make a start for you now. anemone projectors 15:59, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I've done a little bit but I can't do much more right now because my mouse has stopped working and it frustrates me having to use only the keyboard, so perhaps I'll come back to it in a few days. anemone projectors 16:11, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Brilliant thanks AP! I'll try and continue this now. Soaper1234 (talk) 16:33, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I've been through and moved characterisation bits from reception to the characterisation section. How do you think it fairs now? Do you think the reception section is too long? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 17:04, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I think there are some details in the reception section that can probably come out, and some of it can be moved to other sections as well. I'm currently editing it, it might look a bit messed up for a while... anemone projectors 17:22, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks AP, much appreciated. I'm really hoping this article can be a good 'un after the time spent on it! Soaper1234 (talk) 17:25, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

As I'm moving things about, some things might need to be checked like names of people from various news sources, or links to characters and actors. Feel free to rearrange anything else as you see fit, I'll come back to it a bit later as I still think there's more than can be rearranged. anemone projectors 17:48, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I think when everything has been rearranged etc, I'll go through and make sure all editor names and character/actor page links are in the correct order. Thanks again, Soaper1234 (talk) 17:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm definitely done for now. I'll have a read through it in full at some point, hopefully I'll have time in the next few days. The article does look really good - it definitely has enough content. I hope my edits make sense to you - my opinion is that reception relating to specific relationships should appear in those sections, while the reception section should be more general. anemone projectors 17:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I completely agree. I did think the reception section was a bit too OTT, but I wasn't 100% sure it belonged in the development sections. Soaper1234 (talk) 18:00, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I never used to write articles in that way - reception was reception - but with my more recent articles, like Gavin and Paul, I started to change it. By the way I wasn't sure about including reception from forum users, but considering that it was reported on a national newpaper's website, I decided to keep it in. I find the reporting of twitter comments very lazy now - very few people actually write their own reviews these days! Thank goodness for David Brown. anemone projectors 18:07, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I have to admit it is annoys me the lack of real journalism going on through quoting Twitter. I love to see a review article every once in a while. Soaper1234 (talk) 19:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: Hi, I still haven't read the whole thing but I just decided to read the blackmail section, and I wondered if there are any other sources available with more real-world information, because as it stands it's just sourced plot and could just be merged to the storylines section. In the past I've ended up removing entire sections from certain articles for the same reason (I can't remember what articles though). anemone projectors 13:02, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

I was really struggling to find any more than that, however if you have any magazine articles or know of anything that could improve the section, please add it! Soaper1234 (talk) 21:45, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid I wouldn't have time to trawl all my magazines just to see if there's something. Maybe someone else would be able to help... anemone projectors 08:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

That's not a problem. I've found some recent-ish magazines this afternoon so will see if any of them help in any way. Soaper1234 (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Actually I might be able to help. When I read my soap magazines I sometimes write character names on the front page if I think there is some useful information that I might use for Wikipedia later, so I could check these for Babe's name. However I don't do it every time so I might not find anything. I should be able to look tomorrow as I'll be at home all day. anemone projectors 10:05, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

That would be brilliant thanks! Soaper1234 (talk) 10:24, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: So, I've started to find a few things, which is great. I've skipped over quite a few issues where I've written no names though... anyway, I've added information from Soaplife issue 387 where Badland was interviewed over the attack, there is more to the interview so I'll put the relevant quotes on the draft talk page for you so you can decide if it's worth adding in. anemone projectors 09:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

That is brilliant - thank you for all very extra effort! I'll have a look through and see what I can add in. I was very surprised at some of these - I never realised Kate White did a whole article on Babe! Soaper1234 (talk) 10:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: So, I've gone through my pile of soap mags that I have with me, and now I've finished. So hopefully the article is looking better now. I shall continue to read the whole thing through and see if I think there are any other improvements to make! anemone projectors 08:16, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I really do appreciate you collecting information from the soap mags! Although it does look good, I'm sure there are odd bits and bats that need tidying :) Soaper1234 (talk) 17:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, do we think the page could be moved into mainspace? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 14:04, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: Ooh, sorry I've been a bit busy the last few days. Ok if I have a read through first, should be tomorrow? I'm sure it will be fine, though. anemone projectors 17:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

That's not a problem at all, all contributions are much appreciated! :) Soaper1234 (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

I've had an idea for sourcing storylines as we only have four sourced episodes. Instead of just sourcing those episodes and appearing as though we have missed the rest, could we source the whole thing by including a General references section, similar to this? Let me know your thoughts. Soaper1234 (talk) 15:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

That would be ok though I would comment out the existing references so they're not lost, as my preference would be to reference all individual episodes if possible. I have all the episode references saved in Excel so if I can work out the episode dates (maybe from my lists of episodes) then I can easily add the references. I think the guidelines say plot doesn't necessarily need referencing but I think it's good to do so. It can add context by giving a timescale to the storylines. anemone projectors 15:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Shall we do the general reference then at a later day the individual references could be added? Soaper1234 (talk) 16:17, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah that's fine. anemone projectors 16:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I believe the article is now ready! Do you want to check my last edits first before I move it over? anemone projectors 12:07, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for all your edits on the article - it has improved the article loads! If you wouldn't mind moving it to Babe Smith please. Thank you. Soaper1234 (talk) 17:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Done. What a fantastic article, well done! anemone projectors 17:39, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you again. I'm proud of this article but I don't think it could be what it is now without your help either :) Soaper1234 (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Will you be going for DYK? GA? anemone projectors 17:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I'd like to get my first DYK for the article. I have tried before but the article was deemed to be "written like a fan page" so it never got anywhere. Do you think it would be worth a GA status? I've just submitted an article for GA status so I might have to wait a while. Soaper1234 (talk) 17:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I've had character pages on DYK - most recently Paul Coker (EastEnders), so I don't see why Babe shouldn't be able to get it as well. I never bothered for Gavin Sullivan just because the process frustrates me, i.e. having to review something else first (you'd be ok not to do that), but I thought I'd probably go for GA on it one day and then it would be eligible for DYK again. So I say go for it, DYK first, then GA. The worst that can happen is it might fail, but it's only Wikipedia ;-) anemone projectors 18:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Haha, thank you. I've submitted it - Template:Did you know nominations/Babe Smith - feel free to check out the hooks or suggest a new one. Maybe one day a GA status could be in sight. Soaper1234 (talk) 19:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know the DYK nomination did not get reviewed in time. Soaper1234 (talk) 18:11, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

As long as it was nominated in time it doesn't matter. It'll still be reviewed eventually. It can be a slow process - which is why they insisted on those submitting articles to review others. anemone projectors 21:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah right, brilliant. Here's hoping and I should really review some myself. Soaper1234 (talk) 17:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, don't worry too much about reviewing any unless you're looking for a DYK yourself, I would assume the people who want DYKs will be looking to review things, so if people not looking for DYKs are reviewing them it might mean there's not so much for them to review! If that makes sense. Then again there are always DYKs and there's always a backlog. I don't know if you would be allowed to review pages now and then use them as your "QPQ" in a few months time... also as this was your first DYK you never had to actually review anything until you have 5 DYK credits (but it was still helpful as there is a backlog!) anemone projectors 19:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Page protection

I was wondering if it was at all possible if you could protect List of Coronation Street characters (2017) as several users, mainly ones with IP addresses keep on adding Battersby, Tilsley or McDonald to the Oliver character section, despite no confirmation on screen and no sources with the surname. Grangehilllover (talk) 10:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: I just have time to do this now, as I finished work for the week about 8 hours earlier than expected. I'll point out the "busy" notice I put at the top of this page though and recommend Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if I'm busy next time you need this :-) anemone projectors 17:06, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Cheryl

Hi, AnemoneProjectors! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in contributing to WikiProject Cheryl, a project aimed at organizing and improving the quality and accuracy of articles related to Cheryl. Thanks and best regards! Linguist111 (away) (my main account) 08:43, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

@Linguist111 (away) and Linguist111: Probably only because I'm involved in WikiProject The X Factor! I don't have time to get involved in more WikiProjects, sorry! :-) —:anemone:projectors:— 08:46, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

No worries. Suggestion's always there if you change your mind. You'll be a de facto member anyway if you make even small contributions to anything related to Cheryl, I have decided as the project founder :) Linguist ^talk|contribs 09:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Louise Mitchell draft

Do you think User:Grangehilllover/Louise Mitchell is ready for main space yet? Now, there's a lot more development than the last time with yours and others help. Grangehilllover (talk) 10:14, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: It looks like it might be but let me have a read through like I did with Soaper1234's Babe Smith draft and if I can make any changes I will, and I'll get back to you. As I'm free this weekend I decided to dedicate more time to Wikipedia drafts and getting at least one of them completed - I was hoping one of my own but I'll help with yours and maybe I'll be lucky and both will get done! —anemone projectors— 10:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Having said that I'm was planning to go out as well but I'll do what I can! —anemone projectors— 10:21, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Grangehilllover (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: Hope you don't mind, but I've added a couple of edits on the page. Soaper1234 (talk) 10:41, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Soaper! @Grangehilllover: I've done a few sections so I hope you approve of my edits! I noticed the storyline about Louise being in hospital when she stops breathing is missing from the storylines section but is included in development, so that needs to be added. I would have done it but I don't know where it fits into the timeline. I'm sorry if you also don't know! I still need to look at the sections "2016–", which I'm going to see if I can reduce, "Revenge porn and bullying" and "Reception". —anemone projectors— 12:04, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234:, @AnemoneProjectors: I don't mind, thank you. I'll see about the Louise in hospital bit...Grangehilllover (talk) 12:57, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I've put it in now. Grangehilllover (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Excellent, that allows me to remove plot details from the development section :-) Just reception to go now. By the way I can't see any soap magazine references - do you have any to hand or do you need someone else to help find additional sources from them? —anemone projectors— 13:20, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Just wondering - references for which bit? Grangehilllover (talk) 13:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Nothing that is already there - just new information like interviews, reception, etc. —anemone projectors— 13:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Ah right. I don't have soap magazines. Grangehilllover (talk) 13:43, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I'll see if I can find anything that could improve the article. —anemone projectors— 14:00, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I found two sources. If there's anything else it can always be added in future as the article is looking pretty fine at the moment in my opinion! I'd be happy for it to be moved into mainspace. Well done! —anemone projectors— 14:20, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: Hang on, JuneGloom07 reminded me of the previous discussion, which is now at User talk:AnemoneProjectors/Archive 12#Moving page, and a lot of the suggestions still haven't been added, such as the "treacherous", "scheming" and "vulnerable side" quotes I found from a very quick Google search. —anemone projectors— 15:20, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

I also provided magazine scans for the article, but only one seems to have been used. Here's the link again - [5]. - JuneGloom07 Talk 15:24, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

The 2001 one has been added and I added the 2-8 April 2016 one from my own copy. It's possible I didn't find the others today beacuse at the time of reading them, I didn't think there was anything worth adding to a future article and I binned them! Or I just didn't write "Louise" on the front cover so skipped over them today. —anemone projectors— 15:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

While I was editing the draft earlier, I went looking for JuneGloom07's articles, but it was locked so I left it. If you don't mind, would I be alright to add to the article? Soaper1234 (talk) 15:49, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Please go ahead. It would be really good to get this article finished by the end of the weekend, even today if possible! I'm sure GHL won't object :-) —anemone projectors— 15:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

No, I don't mind. I hope I'm not being too much bother and don't mind helping-I appreciate your help and improvements. Grangehilllover (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

It's no bother at all. As I said before I had planned to dedicate this weekend to Wikipedia drafts and hoped to get at least one finished, even if it's helping with someone else's! —anemone projectors— 16:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: Thank you (and to you AP). I've been editing the reintroduction section for now, but I wondered, AP, if there was any sources you used on your Keegan draft that could be used for the revenge porn and bullying section? And could there possibly be any recent (2017) magazine articles about the bullying? Soaper1234 (talk) 16:14, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

The only part about Louise I think is the Duncan Lindsay stuff, which is already mentioned in a shortened version (looking at Keegan's draft I realised the wrong thing was quoted about Louise). I don't think there's been any recent magazine article that could add real-world development. —anemone projectors— 16:23, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Referencing image metadata

Hi I don't suppose you know if there is a way to reference image metadata. For instance I found information about the upcoming EE character Sarah the actress name and episode air date but as it's in image metadata I am not sure how to reference it.

I got the image below.

https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/13343519-low_res-eastenders-april-june-2017.jpg

and put it into this site to read the metadata.

http://exif.regex.info/exif.cgi

I know this is unusual but a good reference. Thanks Kelvin 101 (talk) 22:21, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@Kelvin 101: That's well found. I was meaning to add the character from a magazine source but been soooo busy! The only thing I can think of is to use {{Cite AV media}} but I'm not even sure what parameter would work. So maybe that's not the one. I've never known anything cite image metadata before but it must be possible. It won't be long until the episode airs anyway so you could probably get away with not citing... and maybe just leaving a hidden note saying it's from this image's metadata. —anemone projectors— 07:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

The Queen Victoria

I thought you might like to made aware of the continued vandalism on the Queen Vic page. I've reverted it back to normal now but just be aware they have been continuing. Tomski12 (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I've been very busy in real life for a few weeks and am therefore well behind on my watchlist so I may not catch any vandalism for a while, even when I am about on Wikipedia over the next week. Let me know if you think the page needs semi-protection, though. —anemone projectors— 01:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Kush Kazemi

Hi AP, in the middle of creating the Kush article and I have found a Radio Times article stating Davood Ghadami did an interview with Inside Soap circa 21 August 2015 (I would guess the magazine date would read 22-28 August 2015). I was wondering if you owned this magazine and if so, would be able to share it with me? Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey Soaper1234! I definitely own it, but the question is whether I have it at my house or if it's in storage at my dad's because I've moved since then. I'll check for you a bit later. Does the RT article include much from the interview? When I find a website reporting on magazine content, I sometimes like to cite both so I have the original source, plus an online source that makes it easier to verify, though there is usually a lot that isn't reported from such interviews. anemone projectors 07:14, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, I have two boxes of soap mags going back to September 2012! But sadly it ends in January 2015. So maybe I need to find a third box. The stack of mags that hasn't been boxed starts in November 2015! Jan to November 2015 probably wouldn't take up a lot of space, because to save space I only keep pages with info on EE that I think can be used in Wikipedia and I throw the rest away. I'll have another look. anemone projectors 08:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Wow, it was really a struggle to find the rest of them because they were in a box at the bottom of a pile of stuff, and the box had a load of other, non-soap, magazines at the top so at first I assumed they weren't there, I ended up digging that box out twice! I'm exhausted! ;-) ~~Kush's~~ Davood's interview is indeed in that issue! anemone projectors 08:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh wait, the "Big Interview" is with Rakhee talking about the stillbirth which might be relevant, but there's a smaller Davood interview in relation to the 2015 Inside Soap awards. anemone projectors 08:39, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I've added the two most obvious parts, and I've photographed the page for you, it's here. Hopefully you can read it ok. Maybe in future I can photograph pages for you. anemone projectors 09:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Wow! This is brilliant, thank you for going to such lengths to find this - it is much appreciated! Thanks for adding some stuff in; I'll have a look through it now. If you still have the magazine out, could you perhaps photograph the interview with Rakhee please and I'll see what I can grab for that? I might just have to take you up on that offer... :) Soaper1234 (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: Just found some new reception for Kush (and Shabnam) for your draft – [6]. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk 16:16, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: Thank you :) Soaper1234 (talk) 16:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

I shall do the other interview for you. I'll be keeping my magazine archive somewhere I can access it more easily from now on! Loads of people on Flickr are viewing that Kush one, but I thought I had it well hidden, I changed its upload date to December 2006 so it wouldn't appear to my followers! Oh well. anemone projectors 16:46, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I just read through the interview, and none of it is really relevant to Kush apart from one line, which was reported here. But if you want to use that line and quote the original source, it's page 38 of the same issue (the interview is over pages 36-38), author is Laura-Jayne Tyler, title is... "The Big Interview" and then "As her alter ego is given terrible news, actress Rakhee Thakrar talks us through her most challenging storyline to date..." and then "All Shabnam wants to do is hold her baby!" - I never really know which to use as the article title! anemone projectors 16:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again - surprised that there wasn't much Kush mentions in it! I tend to use the big quote as the title for these types of interviews. Soaper1234 (talk) 17:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi again, just me! I was wondering if you could share with me any magazine sources you have about Kush (and possibly Kush-relating Shabnam bits)? I would really appreciate, thank you. Soaper1234 (talk) 18:06, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes but I can't until Tuesday as I won't be back home until then! I suspect I won't have written "Kush" on the front of many magazines though will have kept many Kush articles, so I might need to dig deeper. anemone projectors 18:27, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

That's not a problem. I need to embed some interview transcripts into the development over the weekend anyway. Thank you. Soaper1234 (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I found two things for you, and hopefully I'll have time to look for more later in the week. Try here. As you can see, when I think something is of interest I put a box around it and when I don't, I put a line through it! But you're welcome to ignore those. The last two pagesI had to re-do because it was unreadable first time! Hence I wrote "photographed" on it! :-) anemone projectors 12:30, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Fab, that is brilliant! Haha, thanks for them! :) Soaper1234 (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: By the way, don't know if you know I have a draft for the stillbirth episode (User:AnemoneProjectors/Episode 5129), you can see if there's anything there of use, and if you come across anything that could be useful for an article about the episode, would you mind sharing it with me? Thanks. —anemone projectors— 09:53, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, that will be much appreciated. I will try to pull some things from them and will try to add some sources, but feel free to grab any from my draft. I'm trying to create an improved List of soap operas with LGBT characters at the moment, hence why my edits are sparse. Soaper1234 - talk 23:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

No problem :-) I would say that certainly needs improvement so I'd be interested to see how you improve it! —anemone projectors— 07:18, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Don't get your hopes up - it is just an easier reader format! Soaper1234 - talk 20:11, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

That's all I was hoping for ;-) —anemone projectors— 21:57, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Notes next to families

I've seen what you've done for Whitney Dean's page with families, but doesn't it seem cluttered if we start adding notes? Isn't that one thing that we want less of in infoboxes? The family pages themselves tell how a character is linked to a family and the infobox explains through a characters relationships how they are linked, for example, Jessie Moore, who appeared in 1997 and 1998, we know from her infobox and Mark and Ruth that their relationship is through fostering. Grangehilllover (talk) 18:50, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I didn't think it seemed cluttered, maybe it is or maybe it does need clarification. It was a long time before we started adding family articles if it was through marriage, and I don't know why we started and I always was a bit uncomfortable with it because we don't add in-laws, so maybe we shouldn't have even started to include in-law families and just put the spouse... —anemone projectors— 22:03, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of adding family articles through marriage either. An editor went around doing it to some of the Neighbours pages and it just seems wrong. For example Daniel Fitzgerald married into the Kennedy family, and he was only apart of it for a year or so. - JuneGloom07 Talk 23:55, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Thing is when Whitney married Lee she joined the Carter family, essentially leaving the Jackson family, so it's a fact that she is a part of that family unit. We list the Carters as Babe's family even though they're her in-laws. So yeah, maybe it is the right thing to do. That's probably my original thinking, actually - it's about family units, not blood relatives. Lee didn't join the Jackson/Branning family when they married so it doesn't work both ways. —anemone projectors— 07:20, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree about Lee-most of Whitney's family had left by then, but she's never really left the Jackson/Branning family either-there's dozens of mentions, off screen visits and those appearances of Tiffany and Morgan too. Since the characters of Whitney and Lee are divorcing, the recent scenes between her and Mick and that 3-hander coming up, maybe after these points, it will determine where Whitney will be placed. Grangehilllover (talk) 09:07, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, there are no Jacksons in the show now, so Whitney is firmly a Carter family member. Yes there are mentions, there would be, and if the Jacksons returned and Whitney moved out of the Carter home, she would leave the Carters and rejoin the Jacksons - or she could end up family-less like... Keegan, Madison, Alexandra, Travis, Josh, Derek, Woody or Fi, they seem be the only ones at the moment not part of a family unit! Yes, I think family should be about units not relations, so therefore marriages are ok if the person joins that family unit. I reckon we don't need notes, if someone hasn't already reverted me I'm going to do it now. —anemone projectors— 09:38, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

What do you think about keeping the Beale/Branning and Carter families on separate lines in the infobox? As they are separate families. Also, should we really list Bianca and her clan as Beales? I feel like they're not part of that unit. I think the family article for the Beales should exclude them.

A cut down example of what the tree would look like:

Unknown
- Kenneth Beale (deceased)
  - Albert Beale, married to Lou Beale
    - Maggie Medeemey, married to Sean Flaherty
      - See Flaherty family
    - Pauline Fowler married to Arthur Fowler and Joe Macer
      - Mark Fowler son of Pauline and Arthur, married to Gill Fowler, Ruth Fowler and Lisa Fowler
        Jessie Moore, daughter of Nicole Moore, fostered by Mark and Ruth
      - Michelle Fowler, daughter of Pauline and Arthur, married to Lofty Holloway and Tim
        Vicki Fowler, daughter of Michelle and Den Watts
        
        Mark Fowler, son of Michelle and Grant Mitchell
      - Martin Fowler, son of Pauline and Arthur, married to Sonia Fowler and Stacey Fowler
        Rebecca Fowler, daughter of Sonia and Martin
        
        Lily Fowler, daughter of Stacey and Ryan Malloy, stepdaughter of Martin
        
        Arthur Fowler, son of Stacey and Kush Kazemi, stepson of Martin
    - Pete Beale, married to Pat Butcher and Kathy Beale
      - David Wicks, son of Pete and Pat, married to Lorraine Wicks
        Bianca Jackson, daughter of David and Carol Jackson, twice married to Ricky Butcher
        See Jackson family
        
        Joe Wicks, son of David and Lorraine
        
        Karen Wicks (deceased), daughter of David and Lorraine

But we would need User:Junipers Liege/EastEnders families to be completed before we start doing that. The Brannings and Jacksons could also be split - Carol's clan are generally separate from Max's and Jack's. —anemone projectors— 09:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

{ping|AnemoneProjectors}} Good idea! And I like the family tree above-I'll change Carol, Bianca, Carol's other kids and that to Jackson family. Grangehilllover (talk) 10:16, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Cool, that redirects to Branning family at the moment but if User:Junipers Liege/EastEnders families becomes an article with all families having redirects then it could be treated separately - and all families can be added to all infoboxes! That's the plan anyway. Anyone want to help? :-) It was a collaboration between me and two other users who have both since left Wikipedia, I've kept it up to date where I can. —anemone projectors— 10:25, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll help when I can. If Rebecca is being listed with Fowler, I'll do it with the other Fowler's if that's OK then. Grangehilllover (talk) 11:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

It's a big project though. I think Fowlers and Beales are separate to a degree but not as much as Brannings and Jacksons... but someone like Bex is certainly all Fowler, but for example, Michelle and Ian are still very much connected. So maybe not all Fowlers need to be changed, I'm not sure, or put both like I did with Carol for Branning and Jackson, since she still has a lot to do with her siblings and father. —anemone projectors— 12:08, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

I think it should be like Carol for the Fowler's. I'd say for Vicki to leave her with just Fowler family as in her first stint, any scenes she did were with Michelle or the other Fowlers all the time. Her second stint was more about Sharon, Dennis and Den. Grangehilllover (talk) 17:27, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Charlie Cotton

I changing him to present because he had a voiceover appearance last night and I think he's likely to appear again. Aacfsftw (talk) 09:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Aacfsftw: As soon as he moves back to Ireland, that should be it for him though, right? — anemone projectors 09:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I'll change him back to past but if he appears again (voiceover or physically) I'll apply the one year rule. Aacfsftw (talk) 09:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Usually voiceovers are just one offs - I presume it was a letter or something he wrote. This should be discussed on the character's talk page, but I wouldn't apply the one-year rule yet. I'm getting pissed off with the one-year rule now - since nothing in EE is confirmed anymore since SOC took over, we're ending up applying it to everyone. — anemone projectors 09:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just to say that since Charlie's departure seems to be final after that voiceover appearance so I would keep him with Matthew in past. Also, I agree with you AP about the castlists - although I understand why it has been done, it causes a lot of confusion to Wikipedia. Soaper1234 - talk 16:36, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

It's not just the cast lists but yeah, SOC has ruined EE in more ways than just its storylines. I agree with Laila Morse when she said today that it's not fun anymore! — anemone projectors 16:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Exactly! She was spot on with what she said - bring back Mo I say! Soaper1234 - talk 16:55, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Babe Smith - GA?

Hi AP, hope you are well! Following the Babe Smith's article appearance on DYK, I was wondering whether you believe the article can make a good candidate for a Good Article? Thanks, Soaper1234 - talk 15:04, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

I would definitely say it's worth a try. The reviewer will probably point out anything to change in the article, so even if it fails it'll be good for the article, but I can't see any reason for it to fail. Go for it! — anemone projectors 00:39, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Brilliant, thank you for your support. I will place it up GA review now. Soaper1234 - talk 14:06, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Just wanted to inform you that the review has begun and since you were a huge part of the article, I thought you might like to track its progress and make comments etc. It can be found here: Talk:Babe Smith/GA1. Soaper1234 - talk 21:46, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

And we may consider that a success! Soaper1234 - talk 21:35, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Hooray! Well done. — anemone projectors 07:20, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

CELEBRITY BIG BROTHER 1

CBB 1 VANDALISM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:8AA4:5600:8D7A:DE4:468A:7CBB (talk) 01:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) 2A02:C7D:8AA4:5600:8D7A:DE4:468A:7CBB - You let a note on my tp and then removed it ... If this was what you were referring too then I've reverted it, If not you're going to need to tell us which CBB article, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 01:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Davey2010. It had been on the page a while so I'm guessing that is what the user meant. — anemone projectors 07:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

No worries, Ah I hadn't even checked the dates, Okie dokie thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 10:14, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

EE Red linkd

Do we still use redlinks on EastEnders pages? On the List of EastEnders characters (2017), they seem to have been removed. Grangehilllover (talk) 18:13, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

For actors I prefer to have at least one link, even if red, so usually in the infobox. It provides a "what links here" link, so in future years we can use the actor name to see if a character or actor has appeared in previous years. Also, can see what other shows they've been in even if they have no article but are redlinked on other pages, which they often are. — anemone projectors 01:49, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Ah, OK. Thanks for explaining. Grangehilllover (talk) 12:33, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Wellard II

Did the show ever specifically say that Wellard II died? I know Sonia told Dot that Robbie lost him but that could mean anything. It could mean that Nita divorced him and took Sami and Wellard II or he escaped and they could find him. So do we know that he specifically died? Arjoccolenty (talk) 20:53, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't know, I haven't seen this week's episodes yet. But I saw a tweet about it - see http://www.digitalspy.com/soaps/eastenders/news/a832431/eastenders-fans-surprised-wellard-ii-dies-robbie-jackson-new-dog and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4670752/Eastenders-heartbreak-death-Wellard-II-revealed.html for example. Usually "lost" implies a death. — anemone projectors 03:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Arjoccolenty: I had a thought about this actually - "lost" could mean that Wellard II was taken by Nita, especially considering that Sami isn't back with Robbie. I don't know what the article currently says but probably best to quote Sonia directly rather than try to infer what she meant. — anemone projectors 14:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

That is true. So we just say he was lost since that is what Sonia said, but off the record, I think that when Nita divorced him and took Sami, she also took Wellard II. Arjoccolenty (talk)

Episode 5276

Hi, I just promoted your DYK hook to Prep 3. I was wondering about your choice of page name. Shouldn't it be Episode 5276 (EastEnders)? This would also apply to the page name for Episode 4466. Yoninah (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Yoninah. I've sort of wondered that myself as there are other television series with an episode 5276 but none of them have a Wikipedia article so it's not an ambiguous title on Wikipedia. We also have Episode 6188, Episode 6646, Episode 7202 and Episode 4429, all of which are other soap operas. Episode 523 (Neighbours) is disambiguated but there isn't a page at Episode 523, so I think that one should be moved. — anemone projectors 14:52, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I kinda question why I disambiguated Episode 523 (Neighbours), but I guess at the time I thought that it could be likely another notable 523rd episode might exist. Not many shows reach 7202 episodes, so I didn't bother with that one. I have no objection to moving Episode 523 though. - JuneGloom07 Talk 20:19, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Episode 5276

On 31 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Episode 5276, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that episode 5276 of the BBC soap opera EastEnders features a transgender character being rejected by his mother? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Episode 5276. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Episode 5276), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih ^Talk 00:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Pretty Baby.... for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pretty Baby.... is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pretty Baby.... until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KMF (talk) 03:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Plans

Do ya have any plans to do articles for the 3 and 2 handers aired in August? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.242.26 (talk) 16:44, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

I was planning on the 3-hander but I have been very busy and haven't started a draft yet. I wasn't aware there was a 2-hander. I've only seen up to 1 August at the moment. — anemone projectors 18:11, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

EE: Jay's father

Should we have Jay's father set up as Jase still or as the homeless boy who perished in the car lot fire in 1994 and is now Tony Hutchinson on Hollyoaks? Phil told Jay that the man that died was his father but immediately afterwards received a phone call and told the person on the other end of the phone he told Jay the "whole pack of lies" so which should it be? Arjoccolenty (talk) 21:25, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

If Phil has admitted to lying then Jay's father is Jase Dyer. P.S. I haven't seen it yet but don't worry, I already read the spoilers of what you just said. — anemone projectors 02:56, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Well it wouldn't have been a spoiler after 3 days but alright. LOL Arjoccolenty (talk) 02:51, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Erm whatever. Still a spoiler for those who haven't seen it. — anemone projectors 07:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

August 2017

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Lady Di (EastEnders), from its old location at User:AnemoneProjectors/Lady Di (EastEnders). This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. » Shadowowl Marcos Rodriguez | t | SPI | AIV | Sandbox | Helpdesk » 08:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lady Di (EastEnders) (August 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Shadowowl was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at List of EastEnders characters (2013)#Lady_Di. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lady Di (EastEnders) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

» Shadowowl Marcos Rodriguez | t | SPI | AIV | Sandbox | Helpdesk » 08:41, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello! AnemoneProjectors, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! » Shadowowl Marcos Rodriguez | t | SPI | AIV | Sandbox | Helpdesk » 08:41, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I did not submit this and would appreciate my drafts being left in my userspace. Thanks. — anemone projectors 09:11, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

Wishing AnemoneProjectors a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 01:03, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Happy Birthday AnemoneProjectors! Hope you have had a fab day :) Soaper1234 - talk 18:05, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Admin confidence survey

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Inside Soap

There's a comment on JuneGloom07's talk page about Hugo, Josh and Luke being added to the villain list. I was wondering if you could take a look and make a decision. Many Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.240.15 (talk) 20:36, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Louise Mitchell draft

Hi,

I've done pretty much everything on the draft and ready to be moved. You can check it over if you like and tell me what you think. Grangehilllover (talk) 19:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: It would be great if you could add my suggestions from January, where I did a quick Google search and immediately found quotes about her being "treacherous", "scheming" and having a "vulnerable side". That's separate from the "Vulnerable" reference already there as that's from later. Unless there's a reason you don't think they should be included. Otherwise it looks good. — anemone projectors 19:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@AnemoneProjectors: OK then. Grangehilllover (talk) 12:04, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

It's up to you, it's just that when you first asked in January I did a Google search and they came up on the first page so I suggested adding them. — anemone projectors 12:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi Grangehilllover, I just wanted to add a comment about the userpage. There is a lot of text that could be paraphrased to avoid copyright. To add to AP's suggestion, a characterisation section could be helpful and insightful too. Soaper1234 - talk 16:10, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: I thought a characterisation section wasn't really needed here because of the way she is introduced as a child and then reintroduced as a main character, the characterisation would only be based around her reintroduction. I did originally try to arrange it that way but ended up with the format it has now as it flowed better.

I just noticed that reference 58 doesn't exist. It has a name "Metro" but there's no citation. It's just after the text "puppy dog face". — anemone projectors 16:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

@AnemoneProjectors: I fixed the ref and added them words in. Grangehilllover (talk) 18:04, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

@Grangehilllover: That's great :-) (just a note you don't need to ping me on my own page as I get a notification (and an email) anyway). I think I'm happy, Soaper1234 and JuneGloom07 are you all happy? — anemone projectors 19:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Grangehilllover (talk) 20:01, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

I think the more recent storylines could do with some condensing, and I agree with Soaper that some more paraphrasing is needed. There's a few too many quotes. - JuneGloom07 Talk 01:22, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, my only criticism is there is too many quotes. Soaper1234 - talk 07:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I forgot you said that :-) it would be better with more paraphrasing, yes. — anemone projectors 08:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Whitney Dean

Can you please explain to 31.48.121.128 about Whitney being listed as Bianca's adopted daughter? I told the user numerous discussions took place before and this has happened before. And about the whole Robert thing with Bobby Beale? Sorry and thanks. In fact, can these pages have some protection? Grangehilllover (talk) 21:48, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

You can't list someone as an adoptive daughter of a character who never adopted her. It's plainly not true. Plus Bobby Beale's full name is Robert. There is now a reference in the article and this is the subject of a discussion here. I am worried about this editor who seems to be threatening suicide to ensure articles are kept the way they want them. I have tried to reach out to discuss this but Grangehilllover refuses to engage. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I thought Bianca had adopted Whitney before the character's arrival but looking at the page history, we originally called them stepmother and stepdaughter, but then changed it to "mother figure" because Bianca and Nathan were not married. On 29 October 2008, an anonymous user added Bianca as Whitney's stepmother to Whitney's infobox, and the next day, another anonymous user changed it from step to adoptive. Was there an episode from around that time that mentioned an adoption? Otherwise this might be a longstanding mistake that we just seem to have accepted and forgotten was actually wrong.

As for Bobby, his birth certificate did say Robert but this could have been a mistake by the props department as he did give his legal name in court as Bobby Beale, and for years we just said his name was not Robert, because Garry decided to call him Bobby, not Robert. Or as you say, it could be a later continuity error and in fact his name actually is meant to be Robert, but like us, EastEnders writers also forgot. Even if it's Robert, consensus was formed some time ago to only list credited names and not full names for fictional characters, but it was never implemented fully in any articles, so it should actually just say Bobby Beale. — anemone projectors 22:35, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Whitney being adopted by Bianca has never been mentioned in the show - it's a common misconception much like Billy/Phil being Jay's adopted father. The Mirror article used as a reference is a mistake - and it wouldn't be the first time a tabloid got something wrong. "Mother figure" is the correct wording. The only character I'd consider should be added to Whitney's infobox would be Tiffany, since they were/are legal sisters because Nathan is on Tiffany's birth certificate.

As for Bobby, the registration of his birth was seen on screen. As in we saw Laura at the registry office and it was mentioned in dialogue, as well as on the prop birth certificate, that his name was Robert (episode dated 26/8/03, as referenced in the article). So the birth certificate prop was not a mistake by the props department, the writing in 2016 was a continuity error by the writers/script editors. This may be worth mentioning in the article as a continuity error. I'm 90% sure he was referred to as Robert around the time of his arrest at least once but I can't remember when so not confident to direct you towards an episode. The birth certificate was seen multiple times (in at least 5 episodes) between 2003 and 2004 as a reminder that Garry was not Bobby's father and Laura had registered Ian as the father. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 22:44, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

My point is about Bianca and Whitney's relationship is thinking realistically about it, during the entire court case and in the first few episodes when Whitney was taken into care with the others, everything about it went through Bianca and never Deborah, even though she wasn't introduced and Whitney was returned to Bianca. It's not like Jane with Peter and Lucy who wanted to be their mum legally because she couldn't have a proper say. Grangehilllover (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

All speculation, like you speculating that Bobby's name was changed from Robert to Bobby when Jane adopted him. Bianca could have some sort of legal guardianship over Whitney like Billy had with Jay, but it was never explicitly stated what this was and Whitney has never been referred to as Bianca's adoptive daughter on-screen. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 22:54, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The only misconception regarding Jay that I see is people thinking Phil fostered him when it was in fact Billy. Please don't say that's also wrong! I won't be watching any episodes though, I'll trust that you have seen them recently. I'm inclined to agree that Whitney wasn't adopted, based on the early page history and my vague memory of it not actually being mentioned. I think we just ended up trusting editors who were wrong and it stuck, and we all believed it, and the Mirror probably saw it on Wikipedia. I don't believe Tiffany and Whitney should be listed as sisters because they aren't actually related by blood. If it were real, Bianca would have got Tiffany's birth certificate changed following Ricky's DNA test.

I've removed "Robert" from Bobby's page because I believe we should use credited names (and it has been discussed before), since this is fiction and not real people.

Something else that's bugged me on this subject - did Jase Dyer really adopt Dawn's daughter Summer? — anemone projectors 23:03, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Regarding "everything about it went through Bianca and never Deborah" - this is a reasonable point but maybe custody had already been granted to Bianca without her being adopted. "Bianca could have some sort of legal guardianship over Whitney [...] but it was never explicitly stated what this was" seems highly accurate. I think we actually do need to remove the adoption. But I would also like some kind of notice or discussion on Whitney and maybe Bianca's talk page about it, to let other editors know. Especially those who are members of WikiProject EastEnders. — anemone projectors 23:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

That's the first I've ever heard of Jase adopting Summer. Since you've invoked a rule that has been discussed but not implemented, I have started removing full names from all EastEnders articles so they at least match Bobby's. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 23:12, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I think we need to double check Jase and Summer because I was never sure but generally trust editors because I forget or may have drifted out while watching an episode!

I'm glad someone is going to take the initiative to just use credited names. I think it's the right thing to do. We don't need to know that Kim's's name is Kimberley Angelica Whatever. It doesn't increase anyone's understanding of the subject. As long as it matches the credits, that's cool. So be careful with certain ones like Fatboy or Woody. Hopefully people will agree with this. The ones I changed already I don't think have been changed back. — anemone projectors 23:18, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Before anything happens, I listed Whitney, Tiff, Liam and Morgan as stepsiblings. In most sources, Whitney is the stepdaughter, but sure they are notable to be listed? It's kind of like Leanne and Toyah from Corrie. Not like Steven who didn't really have any storyline or relationship with Bobby...when Bobby was born, Steven was in New Zealand, on his return, Bobby was a toddler and it was focused on his relationships with Ian, Jane, Lucy and Peter and last year for a few weeks. And in that Whitney Dean reveal thing, the family tree states them as stepsiblings. And after years of them being noted the way they have, it can't be that much of a massive thing, can it? Grangehilllover (talk) 23:37, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Nope, Bianca and Nathan weren't married so you can't call her Whitney's stepmother. "Mother figure" is correct and there's no field for that in the infobox. Stop trying to put a square peg in a round hole to suit your own desires for the article. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 23:46, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

On a separate note - I changed Tanya and Pat so their articles read "Tanya Cross (also Branning and Jessop)" and "Pat Evans (also Wicks and Butcher)" because although the article title is their common name, from other articles (Stacey, Kat, Dot), it seems the most recent surname should be first, then the others (including best-known) come after - hope this is right :) 31.48.121.128 (talk) 23:51, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

But this is a reliable reference that's used on all EE pages. It's the episode it came from.^[1] Grangehilllover (talk) 00:01, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

References

^ Executive Producer: Bryan Kirkwood; Director: Nikki Ryan (22 March 2011). "Whitney's story 22/03/2011". EastEnders. BBC. BBC One.

Bianca being referred to as Whitney's stepmother colloquially in an episode of EastEnders Revealed does not count when Bianca never married Nathan. You can't use something that is plainly and obviously (to anyone with an ounce of common sense) incorrect, just to try and prove your point. She's not Whitney's adoptive mother, and she's not Whitney's stepmother. EE Revealed probably just didn't want to waste time explaining that Whitney was the daughter of Bianca's deceased boyfriend, so they shortened it. It doesn't actually make her Bianca's stepdaughter. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 00:07, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I think we ought to come up with a way of at least including Whitney and Bianca in each other's infoboxes, because there is a notable mother-daughter relationship even if not by blood or marriage. Bianca appears to be Whitney's legal guardian, which is a worth mentioning. However, I don't think there's a listing for stepsiblings in the infobox - if there was the lists would expand way too much, I think.

On the subject of putting the most recent surname first, there's no rule but most of them list the most recent and then the rest in order. My personal preference is to say something like "Tanya Branning (also credited as Tanya Cross and Tanya Branning) is...", using the WP:COMMONNAME first to match the article's title, the same as we do in the infobox, but it would need to be discussed by the WikiProject. — anemone projectors 08:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

My preference would be most recent name first, then other names listed afterwards. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

That's my point. Take Janine-Frank married twice, she stayed close to Pat, even after the divorce, but didn't have a relationship with Peggy despite being a kid when they married. Then, take Max, Abi and Lauren with both Emma and Carmel (even though Carmel is fake), they've been independent through out who ever he has been in a relationship with. I doubt Abi, Lauren, Kush and Shakil will start calling each other brother and sister and consider whoever as another mum or dad, but Whitney considers Bianca a mother and the 3 kids her siblings. Morgan's had a better on screen sister relationship with Whitney as opposed to his biological half-sister, Sasha. Grangehilllover (talk) 13:01, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Well stepfamily are only included if the stepparent had a part in raising the stepchild, not if the stepchild was an adult or if they were in the custody of their other parent at the time, or not in the series - unless there is a good reason to list that relationship, which should be discussed. Chrissie Watts is listed as a stepmother for this reason, the relationship was deemed notable. But that's going off track a bit. Whitney and Bianca should be linked in the infobox somehow because Bianca is Whitney's legal guardian while Whitney is a child. The questions then are, do we include the Tiffany, Morgan and Liam as well somehow, and how do we link Bianca and Whitney using one of the existing parameters? — anemone projectors 13:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

OK, well in most news sources online from Metro, Digital Spy etc, Whitney and Bianca are described as stepmum and stepdaughter at least [7][8][9], so in the EastEnders universe and how they're described in the real world is in this way for like as long as Whitney's been in the show. And with Whitney, Morgan, Tiff and Liam, it is referred to as them being brothers and sisters [10][11]. Maybe then put Bianca as a stepmum and I know that stepsiblings are not usually noted, but I think this is notable enough and should be an exception to the rules as listing it like this - |sisters = [[[Whitney Dean]] (step) - is not much different from how it was like this |halfsisters = Whitney Dean (adoptive) and not really going to make any mess or change. Grangehilllover (talk) 14:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

But sources can be unreliable and wrong. It's easier to call them stepfamily in a news article than anything else. My question is if we should put |stepmother = Bianca Jackson (legal gardian) or |adoptivemother = Bianca Jackson (legal guardian)? If we start putting (step) after siblings then people will start adding no end of step siblings across everything. Plus they're not step siblings because Bianca and Nathan never married. — anemone projectors 15:05, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

One thing I'm not understanding is why this is being treated as if it was real with all the things we do because most of us know it's fiction? The inclusion and exclusion of family depending on how notable they are, using also instead of nee/ne and previously, the removal of middle names, which I do support because it is fiction and that past episodes can be accessed easily now. It seems that these rules are bent slightly to how something it should be. 15:51, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

It's not being treated as if it's real, but we still have to get our facts right. Bianca didn't marry Whitney's father. I think she should be listed as Whitney's legal guardian, not as her step mother. I'm not sure what we'd call Whitney on Bianca's page though. — anemone projectors 16:08, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

How about:

adoptivemother=Bianca Butcher (legal)

halfbrothers=Liam Butcher (legal)
Morgan Butcher (legal)

halfsisters=Tiffany Butcher (legal)

Not much of a difference from before. 16:55, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

We can't call them her legal family when they aren't. We don't know what the arrangement is, all we know is that Bianca never adopted Whitney and never married Nathan, so we can't call her Whitney's adoptive mother or stepmother. The terms I would use would be guardian and (outdated, but it works) ward. Otherwise "mother figure" and "daughter figure" work fine. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Guardian and ward, that works. — anemone projectors 17:32, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

OK, so if we use guardian, would this apply to Cindy and Ian then? Grangehilllover (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that Ian had legal guardianship of Cindy, did he? Her legal guardian was Gina, she just lived with Ian for a while. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

It was the same as Bianca and Whitney-when Ian found out Cindy was pregnant and accused Liam of being the dad, he said "I'm her guardian" and using reality, they don't let a 14-year-old pick and choose where she lives and has to have someone being responsible for her. Grangehilllover (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Did he say legal guardian? I don't think so. Gina tried to come and take her back, she wouldn't have been able to do so if legal guardianship had been signed over to Ian. And of course informal arrangements can be reached about where children live. 31.48.121.128 (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

— [[User:AnemoneProjectors|<font color="green"><span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">a</span>nemone</font>]][[User talk:AnemoneProjectors#top|<font color="#BA0000"><span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">p</span>ro<span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">j</span>ec<span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">t</span>ors</font>]]

→ — anemone projectors

to

— [[User:AnemoneProjectors|<span style="color:green;"><span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">a</span>nemone</span>]][[User talk:AnemoneProjectors#top|<span style="color:#BA0000;"><span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">p</span>ro<span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">j</span>ec<span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">t</span>ors</span>]]

→ — anemone projectors

I assume that your old signature is stored somewhere other than in your user preferences, because there, the character limit is 255, and your signature is 394 characters. The new proposed signature is 408 characters. If you have a workaround for the 255 character limit for the user preferences signature, please let me know!

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 09:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris: Oh hi. I didn't know this was a problem, but I'll change it. My signature was actually this:

— [[User:AnemoneProjectors|<font color="green">{{SUBST:smallcaps|a}}nemone</font>]][[User talk:AnemoneProjectors#top|<font color="#BA0000">{{SUBST:Smallcaps|p}}ro{{SUBST:smallcaps|j}}ec{{SUBST:smallcaps|t}}ors</font>]]

I have now changed it to

— [[User:AnemoneProjectors|<span style="color:green">{{SUBST:smallcaps|a}}nemone</span>]][[User talk:AnemoneProjectors#top|<span style="color:#BA0000">{{SUBST:Smallcaps|p}}ro{{SUBST:smallcaps|j}}ec{{SUBST:smallcaps|t}}ors</span>]]

Is that correct? — anemone projectors 10:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick attention to this! Yes, you have resolved the obsolete HTML tag issue going forward. —Anomalocaris (talk) 10:15, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I see you have changed your signature to:

— [[User:AnemoneProjectors|<span style="color:green;font-variant:small-caps;">anemone</span>]][[User talk:AnemoneProjectors#top|<span style="color:#BA0000;font-variant:small-caps;">projectors</span>]]

→ — anemone projectors

If you want it more like it was before, try:

— [[User:AnemoneProjectors|<span style="color:green;"><span style="font-variant:small-caps;">a</span>nemone</span>]][[User talk:AnemoneProjectors#top|<span style="color:#BA0000;"><span style="font-variant:small-caps;">p</span>ro<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">j</span>ec<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">t</span>ors</span>]]

→ — anemone projectors

—Anomalocaris (talk) 09:59, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I temporarily changed it while looking for something else, and tried something like that but I thought it was still too long. But now I've found a better way of doing it. I used the character map on my PC to look for characters that resembled a smallcaps A, P, J and T, (I figures some alphabet must have these) and actually found that there are characters for all smallcaps letters. So I'm more than happy now, no need to actually use <span style="font-variant:small-caps;"> at all. Unless there's going to be a problem with it not displaying correctly on some browsers, I don't know. — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 10:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't check my previous proposal for length.

So you are using Cyrillic Т; I haven't figured out what the fake A, P, and J are. In terms of display, this works fine. There could be downsides, e.g.:

If you use search with regular letters, it won't find your signature. Try searching on this page for "Anem" (without the quotes), and you'll see that finds all of your signatures except the newest one.
I imagine some screen readers for visually impaired people might read your signature something like one of these:
- Ah-in-the-Voopic-alphabet nemone Rho-in-the-Florpic-alphabet ro Hota-in-the-Screepic-alphabet ec Teh-in-the-Cyrillic-alphabet ors
- unrecognized-letter nemone unrecognized-letter ro unrecognized-letter ec unrecognized-letter ors
- (hic) nemone (hic) ro (hic) ec (hic) ors
I'm making this up; I don't really know how screen readers would read it, but if you are going to do this, you should find out.

Note: I am not sure if Ahecht's interpretation of Wikipedia:Signatures is entirely correct. —Anomalocaris (talk) 10:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Anomalocaris: Ha!!! You're probably right, but it looks good! I was going to use Cyrillic T, but I actually found "Latin Letter Small Capital T", "Latin Letter Small Capital A", "Latin Letter Small Capital J" and "Latin Letter Small Capital P". I got the Google voice to speak "ᴘroᴊecтors" for me and it said "ro e c ors", so perhaps a screen reader won't like it either. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 11:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

It's been a while...

...since I last asked you to do a page move for me! Could you move User:JuneGloom07/Gary to Gary Canning for me? - JuneGloom07 Talk 20:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Done it! — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 21:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! - JuneGloom07 Talk 21:20, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Did I imagine it or was there a discussion about the removal of full/middle names from characters, and only including credited names? I think you might have mentioned it in an edit summary. I'd really like to read and link to it. - JuneGloom07 Talk 16:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: The main one was in the Village Pump. Consensus was there but the discussion was archived before being closed and consensus being confirmed, so nothing was done about it. That discussion is at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 126#RfC: In-universe name details of fictional characters, in article leads, while WikiProject Soap Operas discussed it here. — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 01:39, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I just wanted some back up in case my removal of names is questioned. I deliberately left out Gary's(↑) middle name because he's never been credited with it, but an editor added it in this morning. - JuneGloom07 Talk 02:19, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Attempted edits on Yolande Trueman

Long time no see(?). Someone using various IP addresses repeatedly tries to remove the info about the character's last appearance. What can be done about this? George Ho (talk) 20:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: Hi. Well, normally with EastEnders, when a character has made a couple of appearances, we wait a year before saying they are definitely a past character, and Yolande is still listed at List of EastEnders characters. So technically it's correct at the moment. If you disagree with her being listed as present, I'd suggest discussing it at Talk:List of EastEnders characters. Thanks. — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 22:42, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Stevenage churches

Hi, I can across your four Stevenage church articles when looking at some Architecture Article for creation, here [12]. They're clearly all absolutely fine to move into the mainspace, and obviously you can do that. Am I missing something? All the best. KJP1 (talk) 16:01, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi @KJP1: thanks, I think they are mostly ready but I have handwritten notes I took from local history books that I still need to check for any missing information. This page I know for sure needs some work, but you are probably right that I should look to moving them into mainspace. It's just that I wanted to make sure I hadn't missed anything first. Also, I wanted to see if I could come up with some WP:DYK hooks before moving them over, especially if some of them could be linked together as there is a shared history between at least three of them. And I've had a very busy year this year and haven't been able to do as much on Wikipedia as I would have liked. — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 16:13, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

It's no problem, and I wasn't trying to rush you! Take all the time you need. If it would help for me to move them over, just let me know. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 16:24, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm cool to move them over when I'm ready :-) — ᴀnemone ᴘroᴊecтors 18:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas AnemoneProjectors!!

Hi AnemoneProjectors, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 13:20, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hi AnemoneProjectors. Wishing you a very Merry Christmas and all the best for 2018! Thank you for all your help and contributions this year, Soaper1234 - talk 15:26, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

[Whitney's_Story-1] Executive Producer: Bryan Kirkwood; Director: Nikki Ryan (22 March 2011). "Whitney's story 22/03/2011". EastEnders. BBC. BBC One.

[1]