Talk:As the World Turns

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Peer review As the World Turns has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

I think this should be more of a place for objective reporting on the show's history, not whether you think the "globeless" opening is a "sellout" or not.

[edit] Chris and Nancy Hughes as a super couple

I think it would be good to add an article about Chris and nancy as a super couple, after all they were together for 30 years on the show and stayed together through all the ups and downs in their family and marriage.

The above comment was written by me in June, before I knew how to sign comments. The above issue is now resolved, as a rewrite was necessary for NPOV. Mike H 19:00, Aug 7, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Courteney Cox

When was Courteney Cox on ATWT? IMDb doesn't list her, or was it a one-time appearance? Or is it not the Courteney Cox (note the spelling, not Courtney but Courteny) we all know from Friends? -- Sander 17:34, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It's the same Courtney from Friends. She played on the show in 1984, as a friend of Frannie Hughes. She had a scene at the yacht club, dressed in a tennis outfit. It's documented in soap opera magazines, books, and on the Soapnet cable channel when they show their "They Started on Soaps" program, they include a clip of Courtney's ATWT appearance. --JamesB3 17:45, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] History of show's announcements

It was I that initiated this section (I forgot to log in with my name). If the info is inaccurate or incorrect, please let me know. Hiphats 20:09, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The page may be getting too big. Things like opening sequence, announcements, etc may have to be branched out into separate pages like what happened with the Another World page when I tried to nominate it for FAC. Mike H 21:12, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Page Split

Boo hiss! That page didn't have to be split! You're supposed to do a poll first! Rumble rumble rumble! Juppiter 00:19, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Not only that, but all information covering 1990-2004 has been completely lost! Juppiter 00:21, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

And "noughties?" Could you be more colloquial! Juppiter 00:32, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

A poll was not needed to break up the pages. It was approaching 32k and one is supposed to be bold on Wikipedia. All the information hasn't been lost regarding post-1990, either. Go check the edit histories. Mike H 01:01, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
Thank you, Mike. It wasn't even approaching 32K, it was already at 34K. I did err in putting 56-60/60-70 and so on instead of 56-59, but you fixed that. I was trying to edit and add more information to some of the information currently on the entry, that's why it took longer to post the rest of the 90-04 information. I had no idea that Juppiter or anyone would be so upset. I apologize. The first page was just becoming so long and I think it frees up room and allows more area to discuss not only the history of the program but also other aspects, such as the credits, or famous alumni, or trivia, etc. --JamesB3 02:07, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Ha, it's cool James, I'm one of those people who took forever adjusting to Courtney Cox Arquette's name change. I'll get used to the new article I suppose. What can I say, I'm a spaz. Juppiter 02:36, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

As for "noughties", again it's a term someone made on the area for Saturday Night Live and it's about as good as anything else I've heard. If anyone else has a better idea, go ahead.

No the years from 1990-2004 aren't missing http://soapcentral.com and cheack out the ATWT book by Julie Poll Melbrooksfan101 8:54 6 January 2008

[edit] Criticisms of Storylines

I was reading through the storyline pages and I noticed that criticisms were passed off as relating the storyline. Now I don't like Grayson McCouch as much as anyone, but I think the history articles need to be for relating what happened, no matter if you liked it or not. Criticisms can go at the bottom, in a separate section. Mike H 17:49, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)

Which criticism are you talking about? Do you mean because I said he was stubbled and played the role in a mafioso manner? That wasn't an attack, that was what he himself is doing in the role. He's playing the part that way deliberately, because he feels that Dusty is a somewhat thuggish character. I don't have an opinion one way or the other on McCouch. I liked him on AW, he's OK on ATWT I guess. --JamesB3 18:04, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to single that one out, even though it could have sounded that way. I'm also referring to the "repetitive alcoholism and disco" storyline jab (it does sound like a jab), and the glorious language used to describe the '80s (new heights...it can be worded a little more POV). Again, that wasn't the only instance. Anyway, what needs to be stated is what's going on, not throwing in asides to how the character was in the 1980s, because that's not the here and now. Comparing the characters and the rewrites could very well go in a criticisms section.
If you still don't know what I'm referring to specifically, I can go through each article and paste over here what I think is POV language, or I can just go and change it myself. It isn't just you, it's also others (including, at one time or another, myself). Mike H 19:13, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
I've been guilty of introducing somewhat slanted language myself in spots (though I think I've managed to remove some as well). I'm not troubled by the "glorious" language about the 1980s really. Objectively, in terms of ratings, awards, and critical acclaim the show did in fact reach new heights during this period. It seems legitimate to me to state what sort of place the show was in creatively under the stewardship of different writers and EPs. However, I am troubled by the critiques of recasts (isn't the quality of Graham Winton's performance as Caleb Snyder vs. that of his predecessor Michael David Morrison more a matter for a critical opinion forum than part of an objective history of the show?). I also think some of the writing on the later decades (including my own in spots) operates from the assumption that disuse of older characters automatically equals bad writing and mis-handling of the show. This is certainly the contention of a vocal portion of the fanbase, but should it be an operating assumption when writing a history of show's storylines and behind-the-scenes developments? And is it really necessary to find a way to excoriate Sheffer's work in each decade's entry? He's only been writing the show for the past four years, after all. Quibbles aside, I do like all the high-quality fleshing out that's been happening in the history section(s). Great work! Sterntreiber 20:06, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)
I wouldn't say Sheffer's only been there 4 years. 4 years is a long time. The second longest for any ATWT head writer in the past 20 years. Heck, 25 years. His reign of terror has been long. Juppiter 20:12, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Graham Winton was never accepted by most of the fans. That's not a critique of him, it's just that Michael David Morrison WAS Caleb and many fans could not see another actor in the role. Caleb also had little storyline of his own (he just yelled at his wife a lot) after the recast.
I don't think that saying a show suffers from disusing older characters is simply an opinion. Ratings fell off when the older characters were shoved aside. The people who made these decisions were quickly replaced. Ratings would go back up when the older characters began to be featured again. That's what happened in the 80's, and also in the late 90's. Then when the new faces took over again, the ratings went back down.
I mentioned repetitive stories about discos and alcoholism because those were the stories on ATWT at the time. I mean maybe they were popular, but considering the slide in the ratings ATWT had in the late 70's, I'm not sure. You guys may want to read The Soap Opera Encyclopedia, by the late Christopher Schmering. He mentioned some of the late 70's stuff I mentioned. He went into more details than I did, actually. I don't think I was overly critical of Sheffer. I mainly pointed out his flaws in the 00-04 section. The other mentions were minor and merely pointed out the stories he told for the characters.--JamesB3 02:46, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC) If you guys have serious problems, then I'm sure you've already made changes, but I don't think I went out of my way to be partisan. Believe me, I held back considering some of my feelings about what has been done to ATWT over the past 10 years.

UPDATE:

OK, I edited out some of the more opinionated moments. What do you guys think? --JamesB3 03:09, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think it's phrased just carefully enough to work. And, trust me, James, I've had to hold back to when it comes to Sheffer. There are some writers, like Lynn Latham and Bernard Lechowick, whose styles don't appeal to me personally, but I understand why others like them. But how Sheffer has fans is completely beyond me. I mean, the ATWT of today is just so completely shitty. Even if I hadn't seen the glory years of the show, it'd still be shitty. But, alas, the Wikipedian rules force us to be Swiss. Juppiter 20:06, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, Juppiter. I don't have a very high opinion of Sheffer or of Lorraine Broderick, frankly. It's funny that Leah Laiman got the worst notices of the 3 most recent ATWT headwriters but she's the one I had the least problems with. Anyway, I appreciate all of the comments and help you guys have provided. I'm going to be adding to the histories and backstage dramas of other soaps, so I needed the pointers.

BTW, you guys may want to check out the new page I put up for Michael Louden (ex-Duke Kramer, RIP). I was really surprised to learn of the circumstances surrounding his death. Well, at least he's in a better place now. --JamesB3 20:28, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I fixed some linking in that article and added categories, but otherwise it was very solidly written. Nice linkage to the transvestite story...I didn't know that about him. Mike H 20:53, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Pink?

Why is the background in the table pink? Mike H 01:40, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

Looks blue to me . . . . Juppiter 04:36, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Where the screencap is supposed to be...it looks pink in the background. Mike H 08:26, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation on actors=

Actors who have participated in taping but not aired aren't current cast members. They will be when they get aired. What if someone important in the plot dies? How can one be sure the previously taped episodes won't be revised or re-recorded? The same priniciple applies for actors that are leaving. Perhaps something could happen that would postpone the leaving of the character for another month. S/he would still exist, but not be shown. Encyclopedias contain facts, not speculation. --jag123 08:29, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cady McClain's status ?

Correct me if I am incorrect, but according to all the reports I have read on soapcentral.com and such Cady McClain is a recurring character, and has never signed a contract which allows her to come and go as she pleases from the show. If this is so, she should be listed as a recurring player instead on contract. User:Dowew March 31 2005.

She's on contract, but it's a sweetheart deal. Juppiter 03:42, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Though it should be noted that when she returned in 2007 she is only recurring. 18:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.239.13 (talk)

[edit] Credits sequences

I think the credits sequences borders too much on "who cares?" trivia and should get its own article. Right now I'm in favor of summarizing all the credit information into a paragraph or two in the main article, and then opening up its own article on it for people truly interested to go to and read. Mike H 22:50, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

You really think there should be a seperate article just for the credit sequences? In my opinion, such a thing is not 'worthy' of a seperate article and should stay in the main article. But you're right, it could certainly be shorter. -- Sander 11:29, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I only bring up the separate article thing because it's Wikipedia style to do daughter articles on things that don't belong in the article proper due to space reasons. Personally, a lot of that stuff doesn't need to be in an encyclopedia article, and falls into the realm of trivia. Mike H 11:46, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
Yes, that's absolutely true. Well, if it's Wikipedia style/policy, then go ahead :) -- Sander 15:10, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Head Writer

This is one thing I'm adamant about...the head writer's name should not change until her first story airs. If it already has, my apologies in reverting it. Mike H 23:26, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm cool with this. It hasn't aired yet. Juppiter 01:26, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I noticed an IP changing it back to Passanante. Is she airing NOW? Somehow I doubt it. Mike H 07:23, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Nope. Juppiter 05:05, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
You were reverted with the explanation "(Sheffer has been fired and replaced with Jean Passanante, who was filling in for the last 17 weeks during his absence.)" Mike H 07:39, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
So, actually, we're going to get material that was written by Passanante, but credited to Sheffer before we get material credited only to Passanante. My "sources" tell me we're not there yet. Still, I don't see the point in reverting back and forth. Juppiter 16:30, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Creator

Im nor familiar with ATWT but I am wondering to what capacity was Agnes Nixon the co-creator ? The Book "Worlds Without End" states that Irna Phillips' credit is shared with Nixon. I have found quote by William J. Bell that says "Whenever you think back to 'World', you have to remember Ted Corday, because he and Irna and Agnes Nixon created the show together. It was the very first half-hour television serial. It's ironic to remember how skeptical the industry was about the half-hour serial....World was really a test case. The show quickly emerged as the number one daytime show and ultimately achieved a 64 percent share of the audience of the audience, something that willl never again be equaled." I am asking this as I am working on a project about Agnes and since I am not familiar with ATWT - does she still share the co-creator credit ? Dowew 01:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A mysterious scene

Was there a mysterious scene, where one of the heroines in "As The World Turns" tells another woman, that she 'Has entered a very dark room and she has found something 'red, shining and mysterious? Should it be added? Michael Stanton

Read the history articles. You're being very vague so I don't know who you mean, but for some reason Kim finding that shrine to her in the '80s rings a bell. Mike H. That's hot 06:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's what he means!213.240.234.212 20:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Longest-Running Soap Opera? Hello, I am confused. According to the list of soap operas article, GH is the longest running American soap; yet the date this show began is way before GH started so why isn't ATWT listed as the longest running soap? --Julien Deveraux 19:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't able to find info about that. Superboy88 19:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] merger

yes merge Holden and Lily, a two line article into this article Joan-of-arc 00:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I second that juppiter talk #c 05:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cancellation Section

The entire section needs deletion. It lacks any substance, is pure rumor, and doesn't offer a single citation. Thoughts? The undertow 15:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


I agree. The rumors have no substance. It is based on speculations made by those who do not even watch As The World Turns on message baords.

I went ahead and removed it. It was essentially fan speculation, especially the one part where the editor addressed the readers in the first person "I doubt CBS would go for that." With blatant and questionable "additions" like these, it is best to Be bold and just remove the garbage. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually, as per that day, I did go bold. Someone re-added the section ;)The undertow 13:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ATWT/TEON Connection section/Remove?

I alphabetized this section by actor and put it in table form like the other lists, but because the roles between the two shows were not separated in any way, I had to use common sense to try and separate them. I have no knowledge of either show, however, so someone should check my work to be sure I did not give half of one name to the other character. Actor's names were originally all caps, so I know they are correct.

I have a concern that this section actually does not belong, but I was not going to remove it outright without discussion. Many soap operas share some cast members if only for bit parts. The list seems a bit long and unnecessary especially since the overall article is large (31KB current) and still no decent article has been created for The Edge Of Night. Should it stay or be removed? Discuss. –CobraWiki 21:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The only acknowledged "link" ATWT and EON have is that they debuted on the same day. Soaps sharing actors is pretty widespread and is definitely not limited to these two shows. I'm glad it's removed now. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] We're famous!

Jean Passanante, the HW of ATWT, has acknowledged in the latest Soap Opera Digest that she has read the ATWT section of WP and she thinks it's great. w00t TPTB are reading! Juppiter 20:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:ATWT history

Template:ATWT history has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 19:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

This article does not use that template. In fact, no articles use it. What's in the history section is not this template. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Couples articles

I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casey Hughes and Maddie Coleman today. It may be worth going over the half dozen or so other "couples" articles and appropriately merging content into the individual character articles... — Scientizzle 15:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chauntee Schuler is on contract.

The actress who plays Bonnie McKechnie has been signed to a contract. Confirmed in Soap Opera Digest and on various sites . Please do not keep on moving her to recurring.

http://www.soapcentral.com/atwt/castlist.php 69.90.207.148 (talk) 03:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)samusek2


[edit] Leave Alone Please

I put up reccurring dates and put Bonnie and Noah on contract cause acording to http://www.soapcentral.com/atwt/castlist.php they are on contract Melbrooksfan101

WP:BOLD the_undertow talk 07:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


Schuler & Silbermann are NOT ON CONTRACT! If you ever watch the credits at the end of ATWT, you can tell exactly who is on-contract and who is not. Schuler and Silbermann have been listed with the rest of the recurring actors since their first days. ATWT is always very consistent with this and whomever reported them on-contract was mistaken. Silbermann has also noted in several interviews that he is recurring. There is a reason why I keep changing Silbermann & Schuler to recurring -- it's because that's what they are!! Jhc2010 (talk) 00:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to tell you that you are wrong. It does not matter if they don't appear on the show much. It's that if they have a contract to the show. 71.110.12.236 (talk) 03:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You're the wrong one here. Please rewatch today's episode (Monday, February 11) or watch the show online and look at the credit roll. In the beginning of the cast list, all of the contract actors are listed alphabetically (except for Don Hastings - he's been listed first since the '70s), regardless if they are in an episode for that week or not.

Following Colleen Zenk Pinter, all of the recurring/guest stars that are appearing for that certain week are listed alphabetically. If the recurring actor/character does not appear, the actor/character is omitted from the credits. This is the clear-cut way of telling on ATWT whether a character is on contract or not. Silbermann & Schuler are ALWAYS listed in the recurring/guest section if they appear in the episode. This is how the show has done it for years -- please correct me if I am wrong (which I am not)... FYI, the cast list appears once per week. 67.149.207.206 (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Research your information on it and find references. Melbrooksfan101 talk 22:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Use common sense. Watch the credit roll. 67.149.207.206 (talk) 19:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
You need to read Wikipedia:Citing sources. Melbrooksfan101 talk 22:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
You need to realize that your sources are not credible! There are no online resources that will spell out how the closing credits of a soap opera work -- you're just going to have to take my word on it (which is so obviously correct, but somehow you cannot realize it). 67.149.207.206 (talk) 05:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Nobody has to "take your word" for anything. You are required to source your changes just like everyone else. --Tkynerd (talk) 06:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
The sources being sited by others contain wrong information -- and it's not really possible to cite the closing credits of the show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.207.206 (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
So what exactly, again, are the sources for your changes? "Other people's sources are wrong" is not a source. --Tkynerd (talk) 16:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
My source is the closing credits of the show. The contract cast is grouped together alphabetically (except for Don Hastings who is listed first, and Eileen Fulton who is listed last), followed by all recurring/guest stars that appear on the show during the week in which the credits air. There's no real way to link to the closing credits of the show. But if someone would watch them, they would notice that Schuler & Silbermann are never listed with the rest of the contract cast, and therefore must be recurring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.207.206 (talk) 07:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
There's no particular reason that you can't cite the closing credits of the show, but you also need a source to support your interpretation of them (something that says, "The full cast credits for ATWT list contract cast members and recurring cast members separately"). Otherwise that interpretation is WP:OR and not allowed. --Tkynerd (talk) 13:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The credits don't list Luke Snyder if you say that the credits are all contract cast. Melbrooksfan101 talk 20:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
You're wrong. Look again. The weekly cast credits aired on Monday's episode (Feb. 19). They do list all current contract cast. 67.149.207.206 (talk) 06:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
You still need to site where you got the information from. Melbrooksfan101 talk 01:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I an citing the show's closing credits. Prove me wrong. 67.149.207.206 (talk) 05:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
You need to give references. Put down where you got this information from. Melbrooksfan101 talk 06:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Listen closely, I've only said this FIVE times now... My reference is the show's closing credits! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.207.206 (talk) 22:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Listen closely, I'll say this again: There's no particular reason that you can't cite the closing credits of the show, but you also need a source to support your interpretation of them (something that says, "The full cast credits for ATWT list contract cast members and recurring cast members separately"). Otherwise that interpretation is WP:OR and not allowed. I've tried to make Wikipedia's standards clear to you several times now, and you don't seem to be getting it. Please read and understand WP:V and WP:RS before making any further edits. --Tkynerd (talk) 01:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Your original source, http://www.soapcentral.com/atwt/castlist.php has finally corrected the statuses of Silbermann and Schuler -- they are recurring. Leave the page alone and keep them in recurring where they belong. Finally, you are proved wrong! 67.149.207.206 (talk) 16:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
That could be because they just went ot recurring. Did you think of that? Soap Opera Digest confirmed it way back when. 71.110.12.236 (talk) 00:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Wrong. They changed it on their website because I told e-mailed them the correction. You're very close-minded and you need to brush up on your English. Show me this SOD article too. 67.149.207.206 (talk) 21:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
So when did you start working for ATWT? 71.110.12.236 (talk) 01:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
What's that supposed to mean?? 67.149.207.206 (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
They emailed me saying a spokesperson for ATWT emaild them. 71.110.51.230 (talk) 23:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Who are "they" and "them"?? I'm really confused here... 67.149.207.206 (talk) 03:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
soapoperacentral.com is who. Melbrooksfan101 talk
Hmmm... I went to http://soapoperacentral.com and I don't see much of a website. I think you have cited an incorrect source. Shame on you. 64.128.188.49 (talk) 18:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I menat http://soapcetral.com 71.110.39.141 (talk) 23:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Clicking on your latest link, I am still directed to a page that doesn't resemble a Soap site. Shame on you! You have miscited once again! And what is that word you typed before the link? I've never heard of it. 64.128.188.49 (talk) 18:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
You are rude. I meant http://soapcentral.com. 71.110.39.141 (talk) 23:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
I am not rude -- I just don't like it when people find out that they are wrong and do not believe it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.207.206 (talk) 05:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes you are. I made an error. I misstyped but you knew what I meant and being smart about it.

71.110.39.141 (talk) 23:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Typefaces

I most seriously doubt that credits were shown in Arial during the 1970's, considering that Arial was created in the early 1990's, when Microsoft couldn't license Helvetica at the price they wanted... AnonMoos (talk) 10:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Where is Roseanna Cabot?????

Where is Roseanna Cabot listed under the cast members? Roseanna is currently in a hospital in Europe treating her in her coma. She is Carly's sister and owns Cabot Industries. I would like to see her added to the re-occouring cast members section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.232.152.230 (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Rosanna is no longer on the show. Cady McClain left the show in Dec or Jan. 71.110.12.236 (talk) 01:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Cady's last day was on January 28. 67.149.207.206 (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)