Talk:General Hospital

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the General Hospital article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Edit wars

Will someone please make up their minds when dealing with the coming and goings???? Everyday, there is someone adding the year to when Albert Weiland and Ted King, but then someone takes it off, someone adds it, someone takes it off. Why is there a big deal about this?? Let's keep the year on and keep it at that. Swinquest 14:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the edit wars should stop. The main problem seems to be that people are adding information from personal knowledge, which is against Wikipedia policy. The only information that should be added to this page, should be information that can be verified in a published source, and the source should be included when information is added to this page. Any unsourced information can be removed immediately. --Elonka 19:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
To avoid more edit wars, Bradford Anderson and Kin Shriner are NOT Contract cast last I knew (Anderson refused his, Shriner hasn't been for a while) but someone moved them up with the Contract cast. I'm not going to move it back, I'll let you guys fix that because I don't like the chart thing, but I thought it should be mentioned. (DJ-Siren; April 11, 2007)
Anderson and Shriner keep getting moved around, as does Damon. Damon's contract is good until later this summer. Shriner hasn't been on contract with GH in, what, five years? (Technically Roché doesn't belong on the list either since his contract hasn't started yet, but I don't even want to start that battle.) D'Amico 09:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Amelia, I can't remember the actress name off top of my head, but the character's Amelia, Sources have said all over the ABC boards that she is RECURRING as well, not contract. LoL. That's another war. DJ-Siren 00:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm moving Amelia back to recurring according to her official website on her resume she is RECURRING. http://www.anniewersching.com/home/index.php?location=resume DJ-Siren 08:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Just found out, but not changing it until someone else decides if this is proof or not, Soap Opera Digest confirmed Bradford Anderson signed a multi year contract with GH. DJ-Siren 08:53, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Soap Opera Digest is proof, but you need to list which issue, which article. Like "Soap Opera Digest, February 20, 2007, 'News from the Front'" Or, if you got it off the website, link the exact URL: [http:// (whatever)] --Elonka 06:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
And the edit wars continue. Someone keeps removing Annie Wersching and Kin Shriner from the recurring cast list to the current cast. Sometimes I wonder if it's worth it to have separate lists.MysticBlue 21:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to move the castmembers to a "List" page and see if that helps. --Elonka 23:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
It's just as bad on the template. People think just because Amelia is on EVERY episode lately that she's on contract. When the only difference is really that contract players get paid whether they appear or not, recurring doesn't. But they need to realize that just because she's on every day does NOT mean she's contracted. I believe she's refused to contract anyway, not sure but I know her website still says she's recurring. And something tells me since they like to change it on the template, that splitting the list won't help anyway. DJ-Siren 02:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

A few things I noticed - since when is John Ingle recurring? I hadn't heard any official source say he was bumped down to recurring. Second - I notice a lot of people use soaps.com for their official sources which soaps.com is a great site but they don't always have correct information so be careful what you take from them. They have been wrong about people returning a lot recently. 18:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.82.171.38 (talk • contribs)

When his contract was set to expire at the same time as Stuart Damon's around the time Stuart Damon got fired then brought back to finish out his contract as a ghost. DJ-Siren 19:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unconfirmed information \ Jerry Jacks

I noticed that someone changed James Craig's name to Jerry Jack's simply because of what happened on today's episode (Jax received a phone call from "Jerry" and it turned out to be Craig on the phone). Until it is irrefutable, I don't think it should be assumed that Craig is really Jerry.

He IS Jerry. http://soaptalkscoops.proboards56.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=gh&thread=1177510236 "Guza says "that the thing that has to be explained is buried in the past. God knows he was a troublemaker. God knows he was unpredictable. But he never seemed quite as heinous as Craig was. The thing that will be explained in time is what turned Jerry Jacks. You will hear why his appearance changed. We will deal with that in story and you will know why."" DJ-Siren 00:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
The show is always the final source. The show has confirmed that Sebastian Roché is currently under contract as Jerry Jacks. James Craig was a pseudonym, but he is now officially Jerry Jacks. (This was confirmed by ABC on-air on April 27 in the credits.) D'Amico 02:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lynn Herring's Rumored Return

Someone has been posting that Lynn Herring is returning to GH in May. I have searched the internet and have found no other information to substantiate this. Other sources have said this is only a rumor. MysticBlue 06:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The only information that should go into a Wikipedia article, is that which can be linked to a source, per WP:V. --Elonka 05:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too many relationships

I think that things are starting to get out-of-hand with the character relationships. I'm seeing lists showing up that are covering tenuous relationships like "adoptive paternal half-cousin", on characters that aren't even in the show anymore! I think we need to come up with guidelines that specify that only notable relationships should be included. My recommendation is that we define this as: Immediate family, romantic history, plus relationships to individuals who are or have been part of a key storyline involving that character. --Elonka 21:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree somewhat. I still think we have to include the family members, grand and great grand parents and all. Also, for some characs, these relationships are kinda imp. For Example, Michael Corinthos has a lot of family members, through 3 different families and I think it is iportant to list them all since he interacts with all of them. Also, for situations such as Dillon or Lulu, their step-bro and step-sis should be listed since they are constantly reminded of it in the show. But in cass of where there have been abortions or miscarriages, I don't think these relationships need to be lsited anywhere except in the Parents' to be articles. Exception to this should be Baby Girl McCall since she should be referenced in the pages of Sam, Sonny, Alexis, Kristina, and Molly. I guess, instead of developing guidelines, we should use our judgment. --Charleenmerced Talk 21:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I agree on grandchildren. And in terms of Michael Corinthos, if his character is interacting with other characters, then I'd agree that their relationships should be included. I recommend we move this discussion to the talkpage at Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas, and then we can use our judgment to come up with guidelines that can be used on all soaps, how's that? :) --Elonka 21:58, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article improvement

I'd like to see about improving this article, and maybe getting it up to Good article status. So I thought I'd start this section about what needs to be done to improve it. Off the top of my head:

  • It needs better referencing. There is way too much information in this article that is coming from personal knowledge, and this type of situation is leading to edit wars. I believe that if we get stricter about requiring solid sources, the edit wars will decrease.
  • Too many lists. The information is useful, but an article is more than just multiple lists of information. I recommend that the lists be moved out to separate "List" articles, and that we just keep a brief overview of the information here, with a link to the list.
  • Inappropriate sections. The "Couples" and "Comings and goings" sections seem to be magnets for original research and edit wars. I recommend getting rid of them entirely. If a couple is notable, they can be covered in the character lists and storyline sections.

For examples of what good soap opera articles can look like, see EastEnders and Coronation Street. I'd like to see that we could get at least one American soap opera article up to the same standard. It would take some work to get there, but I think it would be worth the effort, especially if we could actually get the article about the Greatest Soap Opera of All Time, up to Featured status and onto the Wikipedia mainpage.  :) Anybody interested in giving it a try? If so, please sign on below, and also free to make other suggestions about how this article could be improved. --Elonka 04:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Judging from those 2 pages, you would have to put it back to how it was when they had the different decades on the main page, then link in other pages for the Cast, Awards, Ratings etc. lists. Could be done rather easily, but would it be left that way is the question?DJ-Siren 02:10, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree about removing "Couples", but I think "Comings and Goings" should stay. Zackfins54 05:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with all your suggestions, Elonka. MysticBlue 07:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of General Hospital cast members

Per the above discussion, I'm recommending that we move everything in the "Cast" section, to a new article, List of General Hospital castmembers. We already have a List of General Hospital characters, but the new page will list in the same format as we have now (by actor name) instead of by character name. --Elonka 06:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Well done on the new page for the list of cast members, Elonka. My only nitpick is you have "cast members" as one word when it should be two. LOL. ;-) MysticBlue 07:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Fixed. The list is now at List of General Hospital cast members, and I also added some text at the top to try and clarify the difference between "contract" and "recurring" status. Please feel free to expand!  :) --Elonka 09:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
This will be fun to keep, as I already re-split it once today. DJ-Siren 01:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, someone has put the list back on the main page again, and, as usual, they've put Kin Shriner and Annie Wersching back on the contract cast list.MysticBlue 05:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I've requested some temporary semi-protection at WP:RPP, which would prevent anons from editing the page for awhile. Assuming that the protection is granted, that should help us put a freeze on the anon edits, to give us time to reorganize things. --Elonka 06:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
You rock, Elonka.- ;-) MysticBlue 08:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Heh, thanks.  :) Alright, the article is protected from edits by new or anon editors for one week. Let's see how much cleanup we can get done in that time.  :) --Elonka 18:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The list is back, this time a registered user is responsible. I don't know how to revert it back to the way you had it, Elonka. How is this page ever going to make any sense if people keep coming in and changing it again? And they keep putting Kin Shriner and Annie Wersching in the contracted cast list. Arrgh! --MysticBlue 22:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. I've also left a note on his talkpage. And yes, I know it's frustrating and feels a bit like "herding cats," but we can do it. :) The thing to do is to just keep working on the article, revert as necessary, and talk as much as possible. Talking is good here at the discussion page, because it proves consensus. And it's good to leave messages on users' talkpages, to help educate them on "the wiki-way." With as many anon editors who participate here, it's actually my hope that if we can educate them on the right way to do things, we could have a sizable "wiki-army" to sweep through the soaps articles here. We could definitely use the help! But there'll probably be a lot of teaching between here and there.  :) --Elonka 00:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Production and Awards Sections

If you were to split these out, you'll notice like the cast list at first, they'll end up back in, however I believe it would drastically improve the overall look of the article. Lists get annoying to navigate through like this. I would call the Producers and Writers page "General Hospital Production Teams" or something rather than "List of General Hospital producers" however. DJ-Siren 00:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm open to that name, if we can make an actual article about it, like with paragraphs of text. But if all we're doing is moving the list there, then, well, it should be called a list. --Elonka 03:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
True, I wasn't completely thinking straight. But regardless, I think the less lists in the MAIN article, the better quality that article will be. Not only does it make it look better, but it leaves open room for more information in the sense of the article itself. DJ-Siren 20:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Effort should be made on taking care fo this, as well as the Awards section. --Lendorien 15:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inaccurate Information

This person PatA51 (talk · contribs) has been starting character pages (and adding to current ones) with inaccurate information and using questionable links as sources. I've done some cleaning up here and there, but I'm sure there's a lot more to be done. I've noticed on their talk page that they've been flagged several times, too. MysticBlue 10:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rumors are not fact

Rumors are not fact until they are confirmed by GH and/or ABC. More often than not, they are created from someone's active imagination or wishful thinking. For instance, Tom Selleck joining the cast as Jeff Webber? The only place I could find this information is a little known soap forum which is hardly a reliable source. MysticBlue (talk) 06:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Accidental removal when editing

Tried to put in http://www.soapcentral.com/gh/news/2007/0521-clifton.php as a citation for Clifton leaving sometime this summer, and it screwed everything up, dunno what I did wrong. DJ-Siren 01:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

It looks good to me... Did you figure out how to fix it? --Elonka 02:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I was tagging it wrong, I just coppied the tag someone used for Annie Wersching (sp?) and replaced the things appropriately. I had tried to put the tag in WAY wrong. DJ-Siren 03:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ratings

Does anyone know where all the detailed ratings information came from? It's a big section of the article, but doesn't seem to have any references. I recommend that we delete it all, and just link to whatever site is maintaining that info. --Elonka 02:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Couples

Not everyone and their dog are considered a notable couple. I recently took out yet another "supercouple" list which included of course the current ones. I think that MOST would be in agreement that the major ones (Luke/Laura, Alan/Monica, Frisco/Felicia) are the only ones really needing to be listed. And the "supercouple" times ended with the first Lucky/Liz situation (when Jackson was still Lucky). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see a point in listing EVERY couple ever on GH as a "notable couple". —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJ-Siren (talk • contribs) 04:21, June 15, 2007DJ-Siren 05:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I think we need to get very strict about sources here. If anyone wants to add a couple to the list, they need to also add a link to a source that affirms that couple's notability. If there's no source, then the information should be deleted on the spot, per WP:V. --Elonka 16:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Alan and Monica Quartermaine's link page in wikipedia, is an exact copy of the General Hospital main page in wikipedia. Just bringing it to attention. DJ-Siren 20:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it's just a redirect from that name to here. If you look right under the article title, in small print, it'll say where it's redirected from. --Elonka 21:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nonexistent characters

Who IS this person that's inventing all these characters that have never existed on GH? So far, I've found Lindsay Maria Spencer and Robert Justin Scorpio. Not only is it vandalism, it's just downright sad. Does this person not have anything better to do? MysticBlue 22:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Alliwantisu24 (talk · contribs) is the culprit, and has also been uploading a lot of pictures and trying to replace them on top of existing fair use shots. Their talkpage is filling up with warnings, and if they continue, they'll be blocked for vandalism. In some ways they seem like a new editor, but they also seem to have way too much familiarity with Wikipedia systems... New editors wouldn't usually be savvy enough to update a template and multiple "links here" pages all at once. I think we've got a bonafide soap troll. --Elonka 00:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, yay, I just love trolls. MysticBlue 09:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Looks like the damage is a bit more extensive than I'd thought -- they also apparently were adding information as an anon. I could use help from people scanning all the contribs of 72.95.173.7 (talk · contribs), to help clean up the damage. And if you spot any other accounts that were used, let's add them here to keep a central repository. --Elonka 22:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

We have another person with nothing better to do going around the GH character profiles and adding characters that have never existed on the show. Keep an eye out for the work of 65.165.16.202 (talk · contribs).MysticBlue (talk) 08:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contract Characters Listing

I see the problems that this page has with the recurring characters list, so I want to pose this question on the talk page instead of changing it without knowing for sure: Are the people currently on GH:Night Shift still on Contract Status with GH? Since Night Shift was to have a limited run, I'm certain it's possible. Walkerb4 00:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Contracts with GH and Contracts with Nightshift are 2 different things, as they are two completely different shows. Exmaple: Sonya Eddy is contracted to nightshift but NOT to GH. DJ-Siren 07:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
If you like Sonya Eddy, I have good news -- she is under contract now, as confirmed by the August 24, 2007, episode of the show. She was just recently upped to contract status (also refered to in the August 28, 2007, issue of SOD on page 15). It's too bad that she's finally upped to contract as Stan takes a powder again. If they recast, that's four Stans in what -- a year? D'Amico 11:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup - To Do

The following things need to be done for this page (add to list as needed):

  1. Strong effort needs to be made to provide proper sourcing for this page. It seems some effort was made in the past to do so, but much of it was stripped out over time. As it stands now, it is completely unsourced.
  2. Need to generate new page List of Executive Producers and Head Writers and move data to it as well as write a synopsis of that information for the main page.
  3. Need to generate new page List of General Hospital awards and move data to it as well as write a synopsis of that information for the main page.
  4. Perhaps add more info on the impact the show has had on television.

--Lendorien 15:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

THIS IS FUCKING DUMB! KEEP IT ON THE GH MAIN PAGE- IT'S RELATIVE TO GH —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.230.104.73 (talk) 03:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The use of language is not appreciated. Besides, what were you referring to? --Lendorien (talk) 20:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nurses Ball

I wish there was an article about the annual AIDS awareness charity benefit, which lasted from 1994 to 2001. NBK1122 (talk) 00:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Gh1984.jpg

Image:Gh1984.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.

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 17:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Generalhospital1994.jpg

Image:Generalhospital1994.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.

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 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) 21:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)