Talk:List of Emmerdale characters: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 17:43, 12 September 2023 editRaintheone (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers46,458 edits →Merge from List of former Emmerdale characters: comment← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:35, 26 September 2023 edit undoMeena (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers43,713 edits →Merge from List of former Emmerdale characters: closed.Next edit →
Line 30:		Line 30:

	== Merge from ] ==		== Merge from ] ==
			{{Discussion top\|result=The result of this discussion was… no merge. Only opposing votes have been made since the beginning of this discussion from almost three weeks ago. – ] • 11:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)}}

	It's pointless to split lists of characters from a show into current and former. Eventually the show will finish and the merge will be needed. Right now the split doesn't add any value. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]\|]</sub> 04:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC) PS. See also currently ongoing ] which inspired me to start this merge and identical merge proposals at ], ], ], ] and ].		It's pointless to split lists of characters from a show into current and former. Eventually the show will finish and the merge will be needed. Right now the split doesn't add any value. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]\|]</sub> 04:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC) PS. See also currently ongoing ] which inspired me to start this merge and identical merge proposals at ], ], ], ] and ].
	* '''Oppose''' why is it "pointless", is this is your personal opinion? As a soap editor, it provides readers with a differentiation between current and former characters. Due to the size of the former list, a merge would put ] weight. – ] • 10:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)		* '''Oppose''' why is it "pointless", is this is your personal opinion? As a soap editor, it provides readers with a differentiation between current and former characters. Due to the size of the former list, a merge would put ] weight. – ] • 10:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
	* '''Strong opppose''' – it is not pointless. It is important as it ensures that readers are aware between the difference between current and former characters. This is not a sitcom or drama that has had 20 or less main characters – this is a soap opera with constantly changing characters. I disagree that it means that there is a lot of work for editors – it is not, as we are constantly updating character pages etc and we also move characters when they debut, leave, return, are upgraded to regular or recast. Usually when a character leaves an experienced editor or IP moves the character to the former list the minute the episode airs. Both pages are quite big and merging them would cause the page to be too long and possibly tagged with a too long template, let alone it making it even harder to navigate. ] – two pages (one of former and one for present) is not an issue at all and makes it easier to navigate. Also, that policy, along with ], explains how it is important to not make pages too long and too big as it affects download times and creates other issues and suggests that long tables are split off into stand alone pages. The former and present character lists have been used for decades by the soap community through excessive consensus (as I have seen through looking at a lot of the revision history etc from years ago) and this has worked well for years and never caused an issue, so I am surprised that it has been brought up now. ] (]) 12:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)		* '''Strong opppose''' – it is not pointless. It is important as it ensures that readers are aware between the difference between current and former characters. This is not a sitcom or drama that has had 20 or less main characters – this is a soap opera with constantly changing characters. I disagree that it means that there is a lot of work for editors – it is not, as we are constantly updating character pages etc and we also move characters when they debut, leave, return, are upgraded to regular or recast. Usually when a character leaves an experienced editor or IP moves the character to the former list the minute the episode airs. Both pages are quite big and merging them would cause the page to be too long and possibly tagged with a too long template, let alone it making it even harder to navigate. ] – two pages (one of former and one for present) is not an issue at all and makes it easier to navigate. Also, that policy, along with ], explains how it is important to not make pages too long and too big as it affects download times and creates other issues and suggests that long tables are split off into stand alone pages. The former and present character lists have been used for decades by the soap community through excessive consensus (as I have seen through looking at a lot of the revision history etc from years ago) and this has worked well for years and never caused an issue, so I am surprised that it has been brought up now. ] (]) 12:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
	:This discussion has been duplicated across multiple lists. I believe it would have been better to begin a discussion regarding the issue at ]. We could discuss them all at once.] <small>]</small> 17:43, 12 September 2023 (UTC)		:This discussion has been duplicated across multiple lists. I believe it would have been better to begin a discussion regarding the issue at ]. We could discuss them all at once.] <small>]</small> 17:43, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
			{{Discussion bottom}}

Revision as of 11:35, 26 September 2023

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Television: Emmerdale High‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Misplaced Pages articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Emmerdale task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Soap Operas

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Misplaced Pages. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Can somebody update Priya Sharma's character duration by ending it with –2022? We now know she is leaving the show and a source has already been added confirming this. 87.114.2.209 (talk) 16:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Done Soaper1234 - talk 20:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Is she definitely leaving in the New Year?87.114.2.209 (talk) 22:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 87.114.2.209, I believe she is leaving in the new year, as that is what the sources are saying.

Blanchey (talk) 08:58, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

OK. The one I saw said she is due to film her final scenes in a few months time so you are probably right.87.114.2.209 (talk) 17:04, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Merge from List of former Emmerdale characters

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was… no merge. Only opposing votes have been made since the beginning of this discussion from almost three weeks ago. – Meena • 11:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

It's pointless to split lists of characters from a show into current and former. Eventually the show will finish and the merge will be needed. Right now the split doesn't add any value. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC) PS. See also currently ongoing Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of former Hollyoaks characters which inspired me to start this merge and identical merge proposals at Talk:List_of_EastEnders_characters#Merge_from_List_of_former_EastEnders_characters, Talk:List_of_Doctors_characters#Merge_from_List_of_former_Doctors_characters, Talk:List_of_Coronation_Street_characters#Merge_from_List_of_former_Coronation_Street_characters, Talk:List_of_Home_and_Away_characters#Merge_from_List_of_former_Home_and_Away_characters and Talk:List_of_Neighbours_characters#Merge_from_List_of_former_Neighbours_characters.

Oppose why is it "pointless", is this is your personal opinion? As a soap editor, it provides readers with a differentiation between current and former characters. Due to the size of the former list, a merge would put WP:UNDUE weight. – Meena • 10:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Strong opppose – it is not pointless. It is important as it ensures that readers are aware between the difference between current and former characters. This is not a sitcom or drama that has had 20 or less main characters – this is a soap opera with constantly changing characters. I disagree that it means that there is a lot of work for editors – it is not, as we are constantly updating character pages etc and we also move characters when they debut, leave, return, are upgraded to regular or recast. Usually when a character leaves an experienced editor or IP moves the character to the former list the minute the episode airs. Both pages are quite big and merging them would cause the page to be too long and possibly tagged with a *too long* template, let alone it making it even harder to navigate. WP:Misplaced Pages is not paper – two pages (one of former and one for present) is not an issue at all and makes it easier to navigate. Also, that policy, along with Misplaced Pages:Article size, explains how it is important to not make pages too long and too big as it affects download times and creates other issues and suggests that long tables are split off into stand alone pages. The former and present character lists have been used for decades by the soap community through excessive consensus (as I have seen through looking at a lot of the revision history etc from years ago) and this has worked well for years and never caused an issue, so I am surprised that it has been brought up now. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 12:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

This discussion has been duplicated across multiple lists. I believe it would have been better to begin a discussion regarding the issue at WP:SOAPS. We could discuss them all at once.Rain the 1 17:43, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Categories: