Talk:Dot Branning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

EastEnders Portal

This article is part of WikiProject EastEnders, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the popular BBC soap opera EastEnders on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at this page to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

High

This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

1 Bingo Link
2 Article
3 Storylines
4 Fair use rationale for Image:Vlcsnap-552182.png
5 Fair use rationale for Image:Dot&ethel.jpg
6 Fair use rationale for Image:Dot&jim0.jpg
7 Fair use rationale for Image:Dot1985.jpg
8 June Brown was in tears

[edit] Bingo Link

The link for bingo goes to a disambig page. Being as this is a British based series, I assume that it means Housie. If not, the link should go to Bingo (US). Please do not just change it back to Bingo, that is an incorrect link. Warhorus 17:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I apologise for changing it. I assumed bingo was the correct page, as I have never heard of housie. It's only ever called bingo here. I was going to change it back when I realised but you already did. Sweetie Petie 18:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I just wanted to make sure you knew what the story behind the edit was. I forgot myself that since it was call Bingo over where you are that it might seem out of place having it linked to Housie. Personally, I would rather see Housie redirect to Bingo (UK) rather than the other way around, since thats what you guys call it. Either way, thanks a lot for taking the change in stride! Warhorus 18:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article

I though the article seemed a bit incomplete so i decided to add to the content and detail. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparhelda (talk • contribs)

[edit] Storylines

The storylines need to be padded out, especially from the early days - pre-1993. There is way too much about Pauline's death and Tomas, it needs to be trimmed down. I'm also not keen on the AlexWilkes-style mulitple headings... anyone agree? I'm reading the Baffled Heart book at the moment, so I'll add more info to the early life section as and when... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I was also thinking this. Someone's done a great job expanding it recently, but it has become far too detailed in parts. Pauline's death and the Tomas section needs to be cut down a lot to allow for an OOU section and expansion of her early storylines. It's becoming very 'bottom heavy' - several months of the character's history make up the majority of the article. Dot was involved in the Pauline storyline but she wasn't central to the entire plot, so it should be less detailed. I was intending to do something with this article after I did Grant, but I lost my motivation slightly after the last critique we were given so it's taken me longer than I intended :) Gungadin 17:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

My sentiments exactly. I could probably write an OOU section for the Slater sisters - and I could definitely write about Jamie's exit... also there's some information I could write up about May's casting etc... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

We need to write about Dot's dead baby as well. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes this may have been my fault, i've been working on the article alot but i guess i got a bit carried away. -Sparhelda 16 May 2007

Though the key plot elements should definitely be covered, I recommend keeping the plot summary at no longer than 500-1000 words. I'd also like to see more mainstream sources verifying that the elements were "notable" to the world, outside of just the fans of the show. --El on ka 21:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Well thats the Tomas storyline done now. Maybe we could keep it about the same then? I mean, this article could do with some more detail i think. --Sparhelda 19:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

No, a lot of the Tomas stuff (and don't take offence at this) but mostly your contributions need to be cut down a hell of a lot. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I suppose so but i've seen sections as long as that in alot of other articles. But maybe thats cause they were more major storylines though. I always got the impression this would be a big storyline that may go on for a while but its ended up pretty short and uncompliacated. --Sparhelda 20:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Yep, 2 months of storylines does not constitute that amount of writing... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Although i do feel the article is very brief and hazy in sections compared to what alot of the old characters have, Pauline(although that has been majorly cut) Kathy, etc. Dot's an important character and has been in it from basicly the beginning except the 4 year 90s absence. But it requires someone with detailed more knowledge of the older times to extend the article. --Sparhelda 20:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to cut down the Pauline and Tomas sections now. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, maybe not, I'll do it when I get a chance. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd cut it down myself but i have no idea what you think would be appropriate.--Sparhelda 18:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I've cut down "Pauline's death" significantly. There was a lot of detail about other characters, which I removed or condensed. We need to keep the article as focused on Dot as possible. If someone wants to read details about other characters, they can go to their pages.Gungadin 20:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, i over did that section. Sorry. --Sparhelda 19:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

No need to apologise. I realise you were only trying to help by extending the article and what you wrote was good, but it was just too detailed. We only have a finite amount of space and as Dot is still in the show she will be having more storylines and we would soon run out of space if we covered all her storylines in such great detail.

Trampikey and I have discussed giving this page a bit of a make over, which you're welcome to help out with if you want to. If you have any ideas on what you would like to see included/excluded, or how you would like to see the page set out then just mention them here. I'm going to work on an out of universe section so that the page wont get tagged again. Gungadin 21:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah i'd like to help. I'd like to see a bit more detail in some areas, i suppose maybe Dot's storylines haven't been as long and drawn out as some but when you look at some of the other older characters the storyline sections are quite long and detailed without being too OTT. Even ones like Phil and Peggy are quite long and they didn't join the show until 1991 and 1994, in fact i'd say Phil's is probably a bit over done. The first part thats really talked about on the article in chronological order is Dot's departure, her storylines 8 years before should be included in another section or two. A part about her baby dying as Trampikey has mentioned would be good and maybe some character creation and developement. We'll see anyway, no rush.--Sparhelda 14:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Vlcsnap-552182.png

Image:Vlcsnap-552182.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Dot&ethel.jpg

Image:Dot&ethel.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Dot&jim0.jpg

Image:Dot&jim0.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Dot1985.jpg

Image:Dot1985.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] June Brown was in tears

When this article get OOU perspective, something like this can be used as a source: SPOILER ALERT EastEnders' Dot Branning weeps her heart out ^anemone│_projectors 00:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)