Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soap Operas/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas. 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 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Middle names, maiden names, married names, birth names, etc...

Why are we putting all these in the lead? The lead should be the page name and nothing more. All that extra clutter can go in the infobox. This is ridiculous! Nobody calls her "Nicole" and nobody ever has. As we all already know, "née/birth name" aren't supposed to be in the lead because characters aren't real, they were never born. All those different married names are nothing more than common sense. This is pointless. Who cares what the character's middle name is? It's never used for anything and just taking up space. Same with this and this. None of that matters. It could not be more trivial. The lead should be the page name. The rest of everything else can go in the infobox under "other names."Cebr1979 (talk) 13:38, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I feel like this has become an on-going issue and that this has been attempted to be discussed prior, and it did not lead anywhere. I think the on-going addition of marital names is ridiculous, especially where in a fictional soap world a character gets married all-the time within a 10-20 year radius. I believe the common-name should only be used for the opening paragraphs, since that's the only name that's to be used within an ibox and its image captions. The change of the "Alias" parameter to be "Other names" in {{Infobox soap character}} is messy, but it's there for those fan cruft-ish name changes. livelikemusic talk! 02:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

@Livelikemusic:, I agree about not putting the married names on the alias portion but I'd include the birth name of the characters. In the opening paragraphs, however I'd include the characters full name (including middle name) even if they are at times referred to by a nickname such as Sonny Corinthos and Nikki Newman. Jester66 (talk) 22:01, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

That's the very thing that's frustrating about this, though: so many editors don't seem to understand the difference between real people and fictional characters. Lady Gaga is a real person. Her real name is Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta. Nikki Newman is a fictional character. That character's real name is Nikki Newman. "Nicole" is a plot point and nothing more (and a minor one at that): it's part of the storyline surrounding the character's history. That's why we have the storylines section. "Nicole" can get mentioned there... because that's where it belongs. In the real world, the character's name is not, nor has it ever been, "Nicole." Leads are done in a real-world format. Take Carly Manning, for example: In the real-world... "Carly Manning" is NOT a doctor. "Carly Manning" is a fictional character. Real people are doctors. Make believe people are fictional characters. Being a "Doctor of Medicine" is part of the storyline surrounding the fictional character of "Carly Manning." In the real-world (aka: the one we live in): "Carly Manning" is nothing more than a thing... an object. "Carly Manning" has never been to medical school. "Carly Manning" has never been married. "Carly Manning" is not real. There are storylines written about fake, pretend, make believe, fictional "Carly Manning" and those are mentioned in the storyline section of the Carly Manning page. In our real world, "Carly Manning" is not a doctor. In our real word, "Nikki Newman" is not "Nicole."Cebr1979 (talk) 04:19, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Your overall argument and these examples makes no sense whatsoever. It's quite obvious these are fictional characters, but even fictional characters have been their own history and occupation, same can be said for having a 'real' name and being known as another name in the story. This argument is sounding an awful like the whole familial argument involving these soap characters from several months ago. Jester66 (talk) 21:46, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm totally in agreement about the marital names. And I can even get behind excluding things like occupation titles such as "Dr." or "M.D." or "Esq." from the lead. However, you already know my stance on the character names and nicknames. It is my personal belief that the character's FULL NAME (middle name included) should be used in the lead and that's what I've ALWAYS seen. Before I became an editor -- that's just what was happening so I followed. Whether it's appropriate or not because the characters aren't real is not my concern at the moment. Right now, my concern is that no one else has made such a big deal out of stuff like this (names in particular) at all. --Nk3play2 ^my buzz 23:49, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Except it was, in another discussion thread, which no-one paid attention to. So it's happening now, and I think it's complete fan-cruft to have a fictional character's full name in the lead, especially when it comes to martial names. These are fictional characters, and nine-out-of-ten times, middle names are not used, unless during a marriage ceremony, funeral or on a tombstone. livelikemusic talk! 00:26, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

And that's a discussion I wasn't aware of until you just informed me of it. If that's the consensus then I'll abide by it.--Nk3play2 ^my buzz 23:32, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Exactly. We're also here to build an encyclopedia with notable information. If people wanna sit around and know what Lily Winters middle name is, they can build a trivial pursuit. LolCebr1979 (talk) 19:46, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

For the record, I see no issue with including birth names in the lead. My issue, per what I've stated in this, this and this discussion, is including married names in the lead...unless the married name is the title of the article or as common (or close to as common) a name as the WP:Common name. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:59, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

The whole "born" thing has already been convered here.Cebr1979 (talk) 15:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

This is a much better way to handle the whole "born" thing (just pretend the fictional birth date is a fictional birth name).Cebr1979 (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about "born in [so and so year]" type of cases; I think those should be avoided in the lead when added like it's an actual biography; this is per WP:Inuniverse. It should also usually otherwise be avoided because of the SORAS factor, and problems that have repeatedly resulted on Wikipedia from listing the birth date of soap opera characters. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about birth years either (and I could not have made that more clear). I was talking about names, Flyer. That's why I said, "(just pretend the fictional birth date is a fictional birth name)." Easy to understand. You should also read the previous conversation I linked to. Even easier to understand. You'll be understanding in no time!Cebr1979 (talk) 20:08, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

This link you used to reply me is a "born in [so and so year]" type of case; it is not a birth name case. So your 15:35 and "15:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)" replies to me made no sense, and neither does your "20:08, 24 March 2016 (UTC)" reply. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh, goodness. Do you ever read the whole thing in order to fully comprehend it or do you only read enough to respond with nonsense?Cebr1979 (talk) 22:36, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

All names a character has been credited with should be mentioned in the lead. But not maiden names or married names if they haven't been used. All the articles I edit take the format "Firstname Lastname (also Otherlastname)" but it could be changed to "Firstname Lastname (also credited as Other Name)". These are real-world names for fictional characters, not in-universe ones so I see no reason to remove them. In most cases, they are significant other names. AnemoneProjectors 23:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

All names? I disagree, per what I and others have stated about some of these characters having a lot married names. It's unnecessary cruft to include all of Erica Kane's married names in the lead of her article. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Wow, she does have a lot. I do think significant other names that a character has been credited as should be listed, for example, Dot Cotton has been credited as Dot Branning since 2002, which is almost half of her entire history. Individual cases could be looked at individually though, or perhaps it's just down to the difference between British and American soap operas. Also, I thought I'd check Susan Lucci's IMDb page, and it seems to only credit her as Erica Kane (and a different character, Jane Campbell). So it might be right to only include the one name for that character if that's how she's credited. June Brown's IMDb page shows that the character has been credited with the names Cotton and Branning. But I'm all for getting rid of middle names across the board and also full first names if they are known by a shorter name, e.g. Dorothy Cotton for Dot Cotton. AnemoneProjectors 12:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

The whole "married names" thing has already been covered in this thread and could simply be re-read from top to bottom rather than going around in administrator circles.Cebr1979 (talk) 15:35, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

In this case, you removed a name that the character was formerly known by. While that name is not needed in the lead in this case, there will be cases where the alternative name that a character is significantly known by should be in the lead; this is per the WP:Alternative name policy. A character's common name may be the title of the article, but their legal name might be something different and almost as common as their common name; in such cases, both names should be in the lead. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:25, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

No, Flyer. That's where you're wrong and exhibiting that you don't understand the difference between real and fictional people. That fictional character was never known as that name in the real world. In the real world (aka: the one we live in), the character was known as Zarf and then Zoe. At some point in the storyline, it was revealed that Zarf/Zoe had previously been known as Fredrick "Freddie" Luper but, that happened after the character had already debuted. That was a plot point, made after the character had already debuted. In the real world, the character had never been "formerly" known as "Fredrick "Freddie" Luper." Same thing with Katherine Chancellor. Upon the character's inception, the name was Katherine Chancellor. Not Katherine Shepherd. That was part of a later storyline. Victor Newman was not "born Christian Miller." Victor Newman was created by Bill Bell and named Victor Newman. In the real world, Victor Newman was created by Bill Bell and named Victor Newman. A later storyline stated that, within the fictional universe, Victor was born with the name Christian Miller. Leads are not done "in universe." Victor Newman was never born as anything. Leads are done "real-world." In our real-world, Victor Newman debuted as Victor Newman. Katherine Chancellor debuted as Katherine Chancellor. Zoe/Zarf debuted as Zarf and then became Zoe (and thank goodness for that - how lame of a name is "Zarf?").Cebr1979 (talk) 20:25, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

"No, Flyer" does not work here. What I stated above does not "exhibit that [I] don't understand the difference between real and fictional people." That is just your usual, needless, confrontational self spewing out nonsense. Your points about Zoe make no sense. And nowhere did I state that the Zoe's previous name needs to be in the lead. My point was that this discussion was not about "formerly known as" cases that involve names that are not married names, and yet you made that change to the Zoe (All My Children) article citing this discussion as though there is consensus for that type of edit in this discussion. There is no consensus for it. There is no consensus whatsoever in this discussion for you to remove all names from the lead except the page name. And this discussion does not come close to trumping the WP:Alternative name policy. Do read that policy. You stated "Leads are not done 'in universe.'" And that statement is off since we leads may indeed include inuniverse information (such as when summarizing plot information), and a character's birth name is no more inuniverse than any other name a character has. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

So am I missing the part of this discussion where you all agreed to strip the lead down to article name only? I think consensus needs to be pretty clear for a project with thousands of articles. Also, has this discussion ever been taken up by WP:TV, WP:Novels or other Projects with fictional characters? I don't know if I agree or disagree but it's disturbing when global changes to a great number of articles are made by a few isolated editors. — TAnthony^Talk 02:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

First off, you need to decide if you agree or disagree because if you agree... you shouldn't be complaining. Second, not having married names in the lead is an idea celebrated by everyone here (even Flyer and I agree... WOW!). The Tina Lord page is the one you seem to be worried about and that one only had married names taken out of the lead so... Hurray! It's unfortunate you're late to the party but, it's not like this talk was started this afternoon and a few of us have already made some serious headway in accomplishing article clean-up.Cebr1979 (talk) 02:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Cut out the aggressive, condescending tone. TAnthony is correct that your mass changes have no consensus. You are not simply removing married names; you are removing all alternative names, the WP:Alternative name policy be damned. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

And you edit warring here and here with TAnthony to enforce changes that have absolutely no consensus is unacceptable. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

And to top it all off, you have been adding your incorrect comma usage to all these articles while making these mass changes, despite, as seen here, here and here, having been told by various editors that this comma usage is wrong. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Blah blah blah... Honestly? Like, I'm so over the "I've been damaged because I'm not getting my way BS..." Gimme a break, you guys! LOL! When TAnthony was in agreement... there was no "has this discussion ever been taken up by WP:TV, WP:Novels or other Projects with fictional characters?" There was: "Thanks for bringing this up..." and then an immediate edit from him... Grow up, guys. You're being childish. It's unfortunate a discussion happened without you but... that's nobody's fault but your own. We've moved on. Just like you guys move on when it suits you.Cebr1979 (talk) 09:34, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

I already gave my thoughts on this but it seems like there has never been a total major problem with the lead names in the articles before like with the whole relationship between the characters, and of course the constant edit warring with the last airdate of Katherine Chancellor. Jester66 (talk) 05:51, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

"not having married names in the lead is an idea celebrated by everyone here" Really? I don't remember agreeing to it. AnemoneProjectors 09:56, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Well it seems like your perceived consensus is not so clear after all Cebr1979, as I suggested. Let's face it, there are like five of you who actively engage in Project discussions and edit/improve soap articles in a significant way. When you have a guideline change like this that will noticeably affect a great many articles, at some point in the discussion you should make a formal proposal to which the group can agree or oppose. If a majority can agree on something, you should update the guidelines at WP:SOAPS or the Infobox documentation as necessary. Those updates aren't made lightly, so this will confirm that everyone is in agreement and will also give you something concrete to refer to if you are challenged in the future. For now, you don't seem to have any grounds to revert my challenge of your change to Tina Lord. But I decline to fight with you about it.

These discussions about names and infobox details are kind of excruciating, so I haven't been following in detail. I was waiting to see how this one shook out. I'm confused Cebr1979, because above you say that "even Flyer and I agree... WOW!" but then Flyer is the one saying you don't have consensus for your mass changes. And Jester66 and AnemoneProjectors don't seem 100% with you either. I don't have a strong opinion either way at the moment, but you're shooting yourself in the foot by making mass changes and citing a convoluted discussion as your reasoning. You do realize that this has to be enforced in thousands of article moving forward? I'm pretty unfazed at this point by your recurring condescending attitude because I appreciate your efforts in general, but it says something that you are somehow always in the middle of these little controversies. This is a collaborative effort. Being bold and assertive when editing is one thing, being aggressive and disruptive is another. I'm not sure from this discussion if you had an actual consensus about names in the lead before you started updating dozens of articles, and Flyer seems to be suggesting that you are overstepping the scope of what was agreed upon. My point is, if you do your due diligence when you create these situations, you won't have to fight over them FOREVER.— TAnthony^Talk 14:21, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

My "perceived consensus" about married names is still 100% intact. Flyer does agree about that, and so does everyone else. Good.Cebr1979 (talk) 14:41, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Then why are you actively removing all names other than the article title from the lead in multiple articles? And, I should add, you're so obsessed with doing so that you remove citations in use elsewhere in the article, as here and here? — TAnthony^Talk 14:48, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Bots fix that and they do a good job. In this case, you came along before the bot. Lovely and thanks.Cebr1979 (talk) 18:49, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Since Cebr1979 is being disruptive on this matter, against consensus on this talk page, and is actively adding incorrect comma usage after repeated warnings, and after various editors (including WP:Manual of Style editors) have told him he is wrong on the incorrect comma usage, I will be taking him to WP:ANI over all of this hours from now. And I will ping all of you, and others, to that WP:ANI thread. Right now, I am busy. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:26, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Taken to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive editing by Cebr1979. WP:Permalink is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:18, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

These former conversations -1, 2, 3, and 4- are along the same lines as this one started here. It's interesting to note who started them and the circles they're now taking us all in today.Cebr1979 (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Agreeing that the lead should not be cluttered with a bunch of married names is not the same as agreeing that no alternative name should be in the lead. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:32, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I fully that ther is no point on having all these marital last names in the lead unless it is considered a common name. However, someone's birth name, middle name, full name, should be included in the lead. For example, Steffy Forrester was named after her grand-mother Stephanie, that is important information, because readers would want to know is the character's name Steffy or a nickname. Plus, sometimes a character's full name ties to history.  — JJakathestrength (talk, contribs) 15:20, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Flyer22 Reborn and User:TAnthony - I too am in agreement about the married names not being necessary. However, I agree with User:JJakathestrength and I am against removing middle names and birth names/current legal names. For example, Sonny Corinthos's legal name is Michael Corinthos, Jr. and I think it should be included in the lead as Michael "Sonny" Corinthos, Jr.; the same thing with the character's longtime love interest, commonly known as Carly Corinthos, I believe should be written as Caroline Leigh "Carly" Corinthos. I apologize if either of you have already voiced your opinions, I'm just wondering about your thoughts in situations like that.--Nk3play2 ^my buzz 15:26, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree User:Nk3play2, what User:JJakathestrength said was the point I was trying to make whenever I'd reedit the pages. I'd include the title of whatever profession they had like MD, PsyD, etc. Jester66 (talk) 07:28, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

For those who don't know, this matter, in the broader sense, is being discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: In-universe name details of fictional characters, in article leads. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:05, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Sadly the RFC was archived before it was closed, so no official conclusion was reached. anemoneprojectors 10:09, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Auto-assessment of article classes

Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.

If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ Rob^Talk 01:23, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Sally Webster listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Sally Webster to be moved to Sally Metcalfe. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Russell family (Passions) Good Topic Candidate

Hello, This topic covers the seven members of the Russell family, a fictional family that appeared on the American television soap opera Passions, which aired on NBC (1999–2007) and later on DirecTV (2007–08). I have been working on this a lot since the beginning of January and all eight articles have recently been passed as GAs. I would love to have this be a good topic because it would be the first one for a soap opera (as far as I am aware) and would bring more attention to this particular show. Any comments or feedback would be greatly appreciated, as my nomination has largely gone unnoticed. Aoba47 (talk) 18:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Step-family

What are the rules regarding Step-families in soap world? Is it added to all relations in the family or just those that have appeared on-screen with their step-family? CDRL102 (talk) 20:21, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

As far as the infobox, it's usually step-relations with a significant or longstanding connection/relationship. Soap characters marry multiple times, and no one wants 20 siblings listed in an infobox.— TAnthony^Talk 20:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Chad Harris-Crane - featured article candidate

I've nominated the article about the episode Chad Harris-Crane for Featured Article consideration. This article is about a fictional character on the American soap opera Passions. The character made daytime television and soap opera history for participating in the first instance in a soap opera of two men simulating sex, and has also been cited as expanding the representation of LGBT characters of color on daytime television.

Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chad Harris-Crane/archive1. Thank you for your time. Aoba47 (talk) 01:36, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Tamil television soap opera

Hey all, just bringing to your attention that an article on Tamil television soap operas exists in case anyone wants to look at it. Tamil is one of the many languages of India. It seems unusual to have an article about one language's soap operas, as opposed to, say, a general article about India's soap operas, but I'm not too familiar with soaps, so I'll leave that to your expert eyes. It's largely unsourced, too. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:44, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Step-family in infobox

I am presenting a conversation concerning the involvement of step-family members in {{Infobox soap character}}. The standard I am currently seeing is that we list each step-person, with the years for which they are actively related to said-character. I believe this should be changed, as given the length of period marriages last on soap operas, especially those in America, can be quite short and plentiful, and it can cause the infobox to become quite cluttered, and too specific of information. So, what I am suggesting is only included the step-family of the current spouse, if one exists. Or, in the case of parents, the step-parent for those characters who are "young" enough to classify for step-parents. Infoboxes are meant to include an overview of the article's subject matter, and including all of these relationships seems to be very cluttering, and partially why we limited the use of the "Other relatives" parameter to those relationships are important to the notability, etc. of a character. And I feel this should be implemented towards step-family members. What's everyone thinking on this? livelikemusic talk! 21:53, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Over at the soap articles I edit, which are pretty much all British soaps, stepparents and stepchildren are only listed if the stepparent has some part in raising or parenting the child, but not if the stepchild is an adult at the time of the marriage (unless there was consensus to do so for an individual relationship). We don't list any other stepfamily. I would be against removing them if a marriage ends, because if the relationship is notable, it doesn't cease to be notable, and as different episodes are shown at different times in different parts of the world, plus the fact that old episodes are available to buy or watch online, removing a relationship would not necessarily match up to those episodes - i.e. MOS:WAF should apply to infoboxes as well as plot summaries. I'd be happy to remove the years though, which I have proposed before. anemoneprojectors 22:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

The issue, from what I've seen, is that editors love to over-inform people, especially where the infobox is concerned. I'm merely stating that listing every single step-family member is quite overboard, especially for American soap operas, given that marriages aren't know for lasting a significant amount of time. For me, it just seems to be an overcrowded surplus of information. There has got to be a nice middle ground kind of meeting, and the beginning of that would be the removal of years. livelikemusic talk! 23:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I'd definitely support the removal of years from step-family members (especially if adding years goes against MOS:WAF). I also agree with AP's point about adding stepparents or stepchildren only if the stepparent has played a part in raising/parenting the child. - JuneGloom07 Talk 00:58, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Ha, this is why I left out step-relations altogether when I created {{Infobox soap character}}! The "Other relatives" parameter was intended for misc relations outside of immediate family, but even so, it was intended for notable relationships, not every person connected in any conceivable way. Unfortunately, I haven't been paying attention to soap-related articles in recent years; there are now an insane amount of individual parameters LOL. In any case, it's alarming to hear that editors are using year spans for any relations other than marriage, this is the kind of excessive fancruft that gives soap articles a bad name. And if I may quote our own guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas#Character relationships:

For most characters, relatives listed should be limited to closer family and generations having some relevance to the character in question. Remember, more distant relations (step-great-grandchildren?) will be noted in the infoboxes of other characters more closely related to them. This is especially important for long-running characters, who tend to have an excessive amount of relations. See Template:Infobox soap character#Relationship parameters.

Over-inform is the perfect description haha! — TAnthony^Talk 01:16, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@TAnthony: And it is also why I was semi-against merging {{Infobox soap character}} and {{Infobox soap character 2}} because of this happening; people are making infoboxes far too overly detailed and specific, which defeats their purpose. livelikemusic talk! 02:15, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Didn't this all due to the wasted argument involving the Ashley Abbott and Bo Brady pages and those characters relations to John Abbott and Shawn Brady? Jester66 (talk) 03:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

I think longstanding Wikipedians like ourselves understand the fact that the infobox is not meant to be a mini-article that reflects every detail in the body! That said, I can see how step family parameters and others are useful, and Ashley Abbott and Bo Brady are good examples of characters whose stepfathers should be noted, from what I know of those shows. I do think it's weird to see date spans next to Ashley's stepfathers though LOL. My first question is whether these men, their marriages to her mother Dina, and the related onscreen years are actually mentioned and sourced in the body of the article? They are not, insofar as they are all offscreen backstory from before the character of Ashley was introduced in 1982 (though obviously John Abbott is a character on the show who Ashley initially believes is her biological father). Information about these marriages would naturally be included in articles about Dina, John, etc. but Dina's later husbands Javier and Marcel are mere footnotes in context of the character Ashley. Technically, we should not be adding unsourced information, that is not in the article body, to an infobox. Obviously I agree that we should be thorough (within reason) and include what I will call "first degree" relatives, like Ashley's three stepfathers. But the dates seem quite overkill.— TAnthony^Talk 16:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox soap character#Half-siblings feature

See the following section that I started: Template talk:Infobox soap character#Half-siblings feature. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 19:54, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Russell family (Passions) - featured article candidate

I've nominated the article about the episode Russell family (Passions) for Featured Article consideration. This article is about a fictional character on the American soap opera Passions. Comments would be greatly appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Russell family (Passions)/archive1. Thank you for your time. Aoba47 (talk) 15:00, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Victor Newman (fictional character) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Victor Newman (fictional character) to be moved to Victor Newman. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 19:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

La fan listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for La fan to be moved to La Fan. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:17, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Lucas Roberts listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lucas Roberts to be moved to Lucas Horton (Lucas Roberts). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

RfC on the WP:ANDOR guideline

Hi, all. Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Should the WP:ANDOR guideline be softened to begin with "Avoid unless" wording or similar?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Citation overkill proposal at WP:Citation overkill talk page

Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Citations. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Lucas Roberts listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lucas Roberts to be moved to Lucas Horton. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:30, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Dynasty (TV series) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Dynasty (TV series) to be moved to Dynasty (1981 TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:44, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

WP:Citation overkill RfC

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Should this essay be changed to encourage more citations?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:58, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Soap Operas and telenovelas

Because this Wikiproject is not called "Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas and telenovelas". "Soap Operas" is something other than "telenovelas", are different genres.--José^talk 22:07, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

The WikiProject "adopted" the novel genre several years ago as a means to promote article improvement and increase collaboration. Are you suggesting that the WikiProject be renamed, or that novelas have their own? The genres are different, but only really in that novelas are finite; there are few enough active editors in working on either genre, I definitely think it is better to work together.— TAnthony^Talk 22:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

What I suggest is that it be renamed, in order to be able to embrace the genre of "telenovelas". Since here only I see that it mentions articles on "Soap Operas".--Philip^talk 22:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

RfC regarding the WP:Lead guideline -- the first sentence

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#Request for comment on parenthetical information in first sentence. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:30, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Shane Balsom listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Shane Balsom to be moved to Shane Morasco. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 19:32, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

RfC: Red links in infoboxes

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#RfC: Red links in infoboxes. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:14, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Ang Alamat ni Bagani listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Ang Alamat ni Bagani to be moved to Bagani (TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 13:48, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

RfC: Should the WP:TALK guideline discourage interleaving?

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines#RfC: Should the guideline discourage interleaving? #2. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Infobox soap character

Hi, I've posed some questions about {{Infobox soap character}} on that template's talk page. Thanks.— TAnthony^Talk 21:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Ownership issue at Will Horton article

There seems to be a major ownership issue happening at the Will Horton article. Am hoping that other Project editors might step in and help create some settlement of peace at the article, as clearly it's only as if one editor might be able to edit this article, and that other contributions are "issues," etc. livelikemusic talk! 13:24, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Doctors (2000 TV series) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Doctors (2000 TV series) to be moved to Doctors (TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:44, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

La Venganza (Colombian telenovela) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for La Venganza (Colombian telenovela) to be moved to La venganza (2002 telenovela). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 11:00, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Soap_Operas

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 18:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Norris Cole listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Norris Cole to be moved to Norris Cole (Coronation Street). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Character article disambiguation

I just wanted to point out that per WP:NCDAB, generic class is preferred to proper nouns in parenthetical disambiguation. This means that, for example, Max Holden (One Life to Live) should be named Max Holden (character), presuming there are no other fictional characters with this name. I know this has been a guideline for awhile and I also know that for years we have been naming soap character articles and redirects using the show name for disambiguation (take a look at Coronation Street characters, General Hospital characters, Days of Our Lives characters, and others). I'm not going to initiate mass page moves but it's something we should be thinking about, moving forward.— TAnthony^Talk 22:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Ken Barlow listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Ken Barlow to be moved to Ken Barlow (Coronation Street). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:59, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Sisters (TV series) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Sisters (TV series) to be moved to Sisters (U.S. TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:14, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Darren Osborne listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Darren Osborne to be moved to Darren Osborne (Hollyoaks). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:46, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Discussion at Talk:Sonia Fowler

After frequently seeing this article in the Pending Changes queue, I have started a discussion about the relevance of the size of the plot summary in this article in relation to WP:PLOT and MOS:PLOT. This is likely of interest to this project. Thank you. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:41, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice of RFC closure with regards to use of (telenovela) for TV series

An RFC was held at WP:VPP with regards to whether (telenovela) was a suitable disambiguator. The full discussion and closing statement can be viewed at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 140#RfC: Is "telenovela" a suitable disambiguator?

As a result, no change to the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) guideline is in order, and any television series of the telenovela genre is eligible to be moved to titles using (TV series). My suggestion is that for any series (i.e. those that clearly aired on television in first run) can probably be moved uncontroversially - with redirects left in place. If a telenovela name conflicts with another TV series and can't be resolved with WP:NCTV#Additional disambiguation using year and/or country, that too would likely benefit from a full RM discussion. -- Netoholic @ 13:01, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Names, Other Names, and Aliases - Towards a good common policy in lead and infobox

This was last hotly-debated here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Soap_Operas/Archive_11#Middle_names,_maiden_names,_married_names,_birth_names,_etc...

Since then some independent-minded editors have gone through american soap character articles stripping out alternate names and middle names and married names from leads (some of which were important and valuable). There was no consensus for their actions! Indeed, the debate above shows there was several voices calling for their retention, and the arguments to me seemed to be weighted towards their retention of at least some alternate names in the lead.

Where we're at today is (a) there is not a sound central policy on the matter, because the latest debate did not reach the establishment of such a policy, and (b) because different editors have worked at odds, the representation of names in articles is presently uncoordinated and unsatisfactory, (and differs between american soaps and other soaps), and (c) the infobox's Other names category for some characters has become over-loaded with many names, and is, in itself, insufficient to the task of presenting the most essential information clearly.

Here are ideas to help towards a good solution.

Adding Original name and Latest name to Infobox

There are three types of name which are of particular importance: WP:COMMONNAME, original role name, and current role name.

• WP:COMMONNAME is used as the article name.
• The infobox Original name category would be for use when the original role name is different to WP:COMMONNAME.
• The infobox Latest name category would be for use when the current role name is different to WP:COMMONNAME.

Both original and current role name are of such importance that it is right that they are identified as such in the infobox where they differ from WP:COMMONNAME and article name.

Examples of their use

• Sami Brady would use the Latest name category to present the name Sami DiMera (her latest name in the show's credits).
• Lucas Horton would use the Original name category to present the name Lucas Roberts (the original role name, and WP:COMMONNAME for many years).

In the infobox these categories should be in the order: Original name, Latest name, Other names. But each would only appear if needed.

In addition, perhaps the year durations of all non-WP:COMMONNAMES listed under Latest name, Original name, and Other names could appear to the right of the listed name. This would be helpful to the reader, and might be considered best practice.

NB: I am proposing "Latest name" rather than "Current name" because, WP:COMMONNAME is current too.

Adding Aliases Used or Identities Used to Infobox

Currently names appearing listed in Other names include actual role names, full fictional name of characters, and aliases used (or identities used). It strikes me that the latter (aliases/identities used) are different things entirely to a character's name, and they need to be clearly distinguished as such. Currently we have Kristen Blake listed as another name for Susan Banks. Hmmm, well Kristen Blake is a different character entirely who has her own character page! They are *not* the same character! And to add to the confusion Susan Banks is listed as another name of Kristen! It would be best practise, to make sure it is clear as to what is a "real" name and what is an alias, by having a separate, clearly named category for actual aliases. Now, perhaps you think that aliases used don't warrant inclusion anyway, and should just be removed! The trouble with that is that the field name for Other names is (unhelpfully!) alias, so editors *will* put them in! Moreover, I contend that actual aliases are important for several characters, and they will continue to appear in Other names unless a clear new category is created.

In short, pseudonyms need to be clearly distinguished from true names, and a new infobox category would do this best. Aliveness Cascade (talk) 14:41, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

A way to implement

• Create new othernames parameter, with the display label Other names:
• Create new aliasesused parameter, with the display label Aliases used:
• List alias parameter in Old Parameters list, with instuctions to use the new parameters. Aliveness Cascade (talk) 15:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Alternate surnames in lead

For what is worth, I support the inclusion of important alternate role-surnames in the lead in some form. There are various ways of doing this that work well.

A way forward

The ideas I present above will improve the situation, whatever situation prevails regarding the opening sentence in the lead. Please voice your support for these ideas if you agree! Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aliveness Cascade (talk • contribs) 16:53, May 6, 2018 (UTC)

Mark McCormick listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Mark McCormick to be moved to Mark McCormick (Santa Barbara). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:00, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Regular character at what age?

Firstly, my question is more about the likes of those actors/actresses post compulsory school age in like Emmerdale, Coronation Street and EastEnders and really asking if now they can actually be considered regulars? It's just that I've noticed a big difference from when others were in the age bracket and had these "big" storylines like Martin Fowler (James Alexandrou then 17) being responsible for Jamie Mitchell's death, Whitney Dean's (McGarty then 16) being groomed by Tony King or Sarah Platt's (Tina O'Brien then 16) teenage pregnancy).

In Emmerdale and Coronation Street, younger actors are credited inbetween the adults whilst with EastEnders, a character's status is based on their position in credits. Take examples of a few 16/17 year olds: Rosie Bentham, Isobel Steele, Ellie Leach and Maisie Smith, especially the first 3, as I find their appearances no more regular from when they were like 14/15. Here's their episode counts on wikia and they really aren't much more:

• [1]
• [2]
• [3]

Now, outside their acting and the shows, things have changed in recent years with rules and regulations like with education (for example the BBC make considerations for those in further education http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/howwework/policiesandguidelines/childprotection/pdf/licensing_guide.pdf)

I just think maybe it needs changing when they are classified as regular because things have changed. Grangehilllover (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Days of our Lives is set in a fictitious town - NOT Salem, Illinois. Please help fix character pages!

A while back an editor went round putting "Salem, Illinois" as Residence in the Infoboxes of many Days of Our Lives character pages.

This is incorrect, as the NBC.com webpage says: Days of our Lives is set in the fictitious Midwestern town of Salem.[1]

This fictitious Salem has actually been suprisingly mobile, as the show was originally advertised to be set in New England, but that's by the by. In addition, the word Salem in these entries links to Salem (Days of Our Lives) which now only exists as a redirect to Days of Our Lives, as the page for the !fictitious! Salem was recently considered not up-to-scratch.

I put out an appeal to editors interested in american soap operas to fix this where they see it, and edit out the residence entry where "Salem, Illinois" is used.

Thank you for any help you can give.

Aliveness Cascade (talk) 23:07, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

During an appearance on The Today Show in celebrating the fiftieth anniversary, it was stated that Salem was, in fact, located within Illinois. In truth, however, I've always found the "home" and "residence" parameter(s) problematic fan-cruft information.

In reply to livelikemusic's unsigned comment above:

No, it was *not* "stated that Salem was, in fact, located within Illinois", as livelikemusic claims. That is a misrepresentation of what happened, and this is not the first time livelikemusic has mis-represented a source in this fashion, by using "stated" and "in fact" to put a gloss of definitiveness which is not present in a source. If you watch the interview you will find that it is one of the interviewers who says "This is not Salem, Massuachussets; this is Salem, Illinois, right" when she interrupts Thao Penghlis talking about his character, André. Kristian Alfonso nods and says "right", and Penghlis also says "right" but not in a very affirmative way (actually, with a cough), and then carries on about his character. Deidre Hall and Galen Gering look kind-of "what-the-f***", and then the interviewers swiftly move the interview onto other subjects.[2] The fact is that the official show line has been from the beginning that Days' Salem is a fictional town. The towns the interviewer mentions are both real places, and therefore the question is a false dichotomy. It is neither! The Salem in Days has tenuous geography (just somewhere in the midwest), because its geography and laws are created (and changed!) for narrative purposes. Just one example: Will and Sonny got married before gay marriage was legal in Illinois. But you could come up with dozens of examples of why the soap's town is not Salem, Illinois, and not in Illinois. The show's Salem is simply fictional. It is not even a fictional version of Salem, Illinois. It is pure invention from start to finish. Salem, Illinois of the otherhand is very real, and should therefore not be put in as "residence" in character infoboxes. It is completely misleading to do this, and instances should be removed. "Salem, USA" would be acceptable *if* linked to an article about the fictional town. But as the article has been deleted, this is not currently an option. Aliveness Cascade (talk) 14:32, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

References

1. "Days of Our Lives". nbc.com. Retrieved 2018-05-05.
2. "'Days of Our Lives'! Cast Reunites For 50th Anniversary. TODAY, NBC. At 3:34". {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)

Bigg Boss listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Bigg Boss to be moved to Bigg Boss (Indian TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Character classifications

I've made a bunch of proposals to improve on the messy situation we have now. Please see here: Template_talk:Infobox_soap_character#Classifications - Aliveness Cascade (talk) 04:48, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Alguien te mira listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Alguien te mira to be moved to Alguien te mira (Chilean TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 16:33, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Dama y obrero listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Dama y obrero to be moved to Dama y obrero (Chilean TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:18, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

¿Dónde está Elisa? listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for ¿Dónde está Elisa? to be moved to ¿Dónde está Elisa? (Chilean TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Bigg Boss listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Bigg Boss to be moved to Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 13:16, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

One Life to Live storylines (1968–79) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for One Life to Live storylines (1968–79) to be moved to One Life to Live storylines (1968–1979). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of Holby City episodes* listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of Holby City episodes* to be moved to List of Holby City episodes (series 1–11). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 03:06, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

The Bold and the Beautiful

There's a long-standing unopposed proposal to merge a set of minor characters into The Bold and the Beautiful secondary characters. Anyone up for some judicious trimming without or without merging? Klbrain (talk) 22:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Essie Harrison listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Essie Harrison to be moved to Essie di Lucca. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:04, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Virasaat (Sahara One) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Virasaat (Sahara One) to be moved to Virasaat (2002 TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Finn O'Connor (Hollyoaks) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Finn O'Connor (Hollyoaks) to be moved to Finn O'Connor. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 01:32, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

All My Children cast members listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for All My Children cast members to be moved to List of All My Children cast members. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Days of Our Lives characters (1960s) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Days of Our Lives characters (1960s) to be moved to List of Days of Our Lives characters (1960s). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 09:03, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Ye Hai Mohabbatein listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Ye Hai Mohabbatein to be moved to Yeh Hai Mohabbatein. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Days of Our Lives characters (1960s) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Days of Our Lives characters (1960s) to be moved to List of Days of Our Lives characters (1960s). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 18:02, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Coronation Street

The article on Coronation Street is marked on its talk page as being of interest to yout WikiProject Group. It is marked as B-class on the Quality Scale, but has not had a rating from your WikiProject Group on the Importance Scale. Could this be remedied, please? I would think it would be classified as either High Importance or else as Top Importance, given that Coronation Street is one of the most famous of all soap operas. Vorbee (talk) 16:36, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Callum Jones listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Callum Jones to be moved to Callum Rebecchi. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 06:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of characters article format

Is there a recommended format for list of characters articles in Category:Lists of soap opera characters by series?

There are some nice ones like List of Dallas characters and List of Revenge characters, some that have infoboxes and/or extended paragraphs of prose about the characters (e.g. List of Santa Barbara cast and characters), some that are tabular (e.g. List of The Young and the Restless characters).

Others use the deprecated (right?) markup ";character_name" and ':' indenting instead of proper list markup (e.g. List of Another World characters). It's this last group that I'm concerned about. Should they be changed to tables or at least subsection/bullet markup for accessibility/consistency/maintainability? Has this been discussed somewhere? (I couldn't find anything in this project's talk archives.) —[AlanM1(talk)]— 18:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Doctors (2000 TV series) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Doctors (2000 TV series) to be moved to Doctors (soap opera). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:15, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Lies of the Heart listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lies of the Heart to be moved to Doli Armaano Ki. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 19:31, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

El corazón nunca se equivoca listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for El corazón nunca se equivoca to be moved to Juntos el corazón nunca se equivoca. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Gail McIntyre listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Gail McIntyre to be moved to Gail Platt. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

"Deceased cast members" on cast lists?

Should there be a dedicated section for deceased cast members on cast lists? It seems a bit reductive, as they're already "previous"/"past" cast members. livelikemusic talk! 22:41, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Rebelde (Mexican TV series) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Rebelde (Mexican TV series) to be moved to Rebelde. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:45, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Turn some inactive child WikiProjects into a Taskforce?

WikiProject Soap Operas has some inactive TV-show specific child WikiProjects. I invite editors to join the discussion at WP:WikiProject Television to convert those (NOT this parent WikiProject) into taskforces. – sgeureka ^t•c 12:56, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Toadfish Rebecchi listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Toadfish Rebecchi to be moved to Toadie Rebecchi. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 06:46, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

La usurpadora (1998 TV series) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for La usurpadora (1998 TV series) to be moved to La usurpadora (Mexican telenovela). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Killer BOB listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Killer BOB to be moved to Bob (Twin Peaks). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Kelly Taylor (90210) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Kelly Taylor (90210) to be moved to Kelly Taylor (Beverly Hills, 90210). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:32, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Brenda Walsh (character) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Brenda Walsh (character) to be moved to Brenda Walsh (Beverly Hills, 90210). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Jennifer Pace listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Jennifer Pace to be moved to Jennifer Pace (Search for Tomorrow). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 03:47, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Bigg Boss Bangla listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Bigg Boss Bangla to be moved to Bigg Boss (Bangla TV series). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 01:50, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Howard Bellamy (Doctors) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Howard Bellamy (Doctors) to be moved to Howard Bellamy. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Series plot summaries

Hi there, I don't know if this is an active community, but I'll float my question: How does this WikiProject address soap opera plot summaries? At Ishq Mein Marjawan 2 and many other soap opera articles, the Plot section tends to get bloated as each day, people add that day's developments. As you all know WP:TVPLOT wants this section kept at 500 words per season.

An alternative I suggested to these editors was to create an episode list, but I can see that getting massive quickly, since a daily soap will generate hundreds of eps per year. So what's the smart alternative here, and should something be added to MOS:TV to provide guidance about this? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Some alternatives to a soap episode list that I know of are Major Emmerdale storylines and History of Hollyoaks – only major storylines should be included, as well as real-world information of course, but perhaps that is a good alternative? – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 18:32, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@DarkGlow: Hey there, thanks for the reply. That is helpful. Do you have any examples of these sort of summaries being presented in a main article about the series? Obviously the summaries you pointed me to are beefy content forks, so I'm trying to figure out how to guide editors to build them in a main article until they warrant being forked. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: The only one I know of is Doctors (since I wrote that). I'd say it's not too lengthy, but covers the main stories? – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 18:42, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@DarkGlow: I'll take a look, thank you. Is this an active WikiProject? With Soap Operas being insanely popular, especially in Asian nations, it would be helpful to for enthusiasts of soap articles to draw up some guidelines. That's not a criticism of anybody, it's just hard to get people to adhere to a community standard if there's no clear community standard. Lol. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:50, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I know there are a lot of western soap editors on here. I edit British soap pages, and know of those who edit Australian and American soaps. There are some guidelines that we follow on the main page, but it would be good to have a consensus on plot sections I guess! – DarkGlow (contribs • talk) 19:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)