Talk:Humour in Coronation Street

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an attempt to build consistent guidelines for articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. 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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating.

[edit] Cleanup

Content moved out of main Coronation Street article to help reduce its page size. This still needs a cleanup though. Essexmutant 23:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup and Expansion

I am surprised that parts of this are even classed as being 'comedy'. The storyline involving 'The Red Rec' was certainly not comedy-based - although Emily Bishop up a tree was seen as hilarious by some.

I will be happy to add to this article, but I am giving myself a bit of a break as I've went edit-crazy over the past couple of days.

Sections which need to certainly be added are:

  • A section on the dry humour of the programme - some of the funniest characters were humourous because of the writing, not the 'comic situations'.
  • Double Acts and Groups
    • Ena, Minnie & Martha.
    • Minnie Caldwell & Jed Stone.
    • Stan & Hilda Ogden, Eddie Yeats.
    • Rita & Mavis.
    • 'The Rovers Quartet' - Bet Lynch, Betty Turpin, Fred Gee & Annie Walker.
    • Jack & Vera Duckworth.
    • Rita & Norris.
  • Bettabuy (expanded on Reg to include Curly, Raquel, Vera, Ivy, Kimberly and her 'Mummy' & 'Daddy', Anne Malone, Maureen Holdsworth & Maud Grimes)

It is important to note that all Coronation Street characters are used in a comedic capacity at some time or other. While the slapstick moments are sometimes more memorable, the underlying humour is what makes Coronation Street what it is. Ben 01:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Began cleanup on this entry. Created a basic structure. Started modifying existing entries for readability and to bring under WP standards. Heaps to do still. Most of the older sections need rewriting and to demonstrate verifiability. Eponymoose 12:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)