Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Emmerdale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
  • User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
  • User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:07, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 13:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Goals for the project!

  1. Stop creating new character pages, and improve the existing ones!
  2. Improve the main article (Emmerdale), which is in a sorry state and is predominantly someone's point of view. It needs references, facts, and good information. Not "memorable exits". Use the article EastEnders as a guideline.
  3. Same goes for the other pages. I haven't looked at the "major storylines" one yet, but I bet it's as bad as the others! With one big push we can clean up the articles, then start to improve them. Basic errors are there, such as spelling and grammar, that need to be fixed as soon as possible!
  4. "Plane crash" isn't capitalised.
  5. All character articles should have an infobox.

-Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 23:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article rankings?

Any thoughts about ranking the Emmerdale-based articles (ie: the system used for other projects ranking articles such as Stub/Start/B/GA/A/FA)? If we could get a detailed and consolidated list of all articles, including those in desperate need of assistance, it might make it easier for people to contribute. At the moment, there is very much a lack of information that is in one place and most people seem to edit or fix articles as and when they find them. Bungle44 17:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heath & Cath Hope

I don't know how notable these two are, but they seem to be covered by this Wikiproject. Are they notable? What should be done with the article? J Milburn 12:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any need to have a combined article for them, when there is and also individual articles for them as well. Bungle44 13:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested Changes

There seem to be a large number of Emmerdale articles on wikipedia which do not meet the notability criteria set out at WP:Fict. I have begun putting merger notices on some articles but would suggest the following:

  • List of Emmerdale characters - Remains as it is now, a list of current and past characters
  • List of minor Emmerdale characters - A list of minor characters who are currently in the show with a picture and some basic information in the style of List of recurring characters from The Simpsons. This would only be for characters on the show at the present time. Any new characters would go onto here and could then be spun off into their own articles at a later date once they have been established. I would tend to define minor as not having had stories in their own right and not having had individual press coverage (from which sources could then be quoted). I would also consider having a general guide on the length of time a character is in the show unless they are particularly notable before they can have their own page, although I'm not sure what this time would be. For example Debbie Dingle would warrant her own page because she is an established character, in the show for a long time and has had a number of stories in her own right whereas Vikesh Dasari would not as he has been in the show for a relatively short time and has only been associated with the story involving Tom Kings death rather than a story of his own.
I have created an article under the same name as the one above, with enough information which could be used as a starting point. Given the lack of activity with regards to communication on the Emmerdale wikiproject, I felt it best to actually make the article so people can see what it could develop into. Hopefully people will agree this is a good move and it could be a starting point for the next phase. Bungle44 17:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I reordered this page and included families but I don't believe Eddie, Grace & Vikesh belong here as they are more than minor characters. Eddie will be around for three months and Grace and Vikesh are a major part of the biggest storyline in Emmerdale's history. I agree that Gabby Thomas, TJ Woods, Kayleigh Gibbs, Sarah Dingle, Samson Dingle, Jenny Albright should be part of the minor characters section. The others marked to be part of the minor characters are far more than minor characters. Jameshdl 14:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with your classification and disagreement of the given Minor Characters, and have proposed a potential new article List of recurring Emmerdale characters on your talk page accordingly. Although ther has been little response, it seems noone has posted in opposition to this change, so maybe we should move the rest of the proposed minor characters over to the new article? Bungle44 14:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
While I was editing the minor characters article I thought that we should just get rid of this article and put them in the Recurring article, the Hope twins should be included as well. However I've come to dislike the idea of removing the likes of Eddie Hope, Vaughan, Barraclough, Dasari, McNally and Burgess from the main page since they are full cast members. Just because they don't appear in every single episode doesn't mean they aren't full cast members. Sometimes we could go a couple of weeks without seeing some cast members, for example, Jamie Hope hasn't been on screen since Tom's funeral and Jasmine Thomas hasn't been seen since before that (I'm not suggesting putting these two in to the Recurring) so I am for the Minor Characters article to be replaced by the Recurring Characters article. Jameshdl 10:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
The other alternative is to simply rename the current minor characters article into the proposed List of recurring Emmerdale characters and amend the included characters accordingly. A few of the initial characters included upon article creation are in essence just recurring characters, and maybe that classification would be better suited as opposed to "minor"? Bungle44 11:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with renaming the article from Minor to Recurring. Jameshdl 11:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • List of past Emmerdale characters - Similar to the category above but for characters no longer in the show. This page in itself could become unmanageable and once we have some content could consider splitting this down and making the above a disambiguation page for List of past Emmerdale characters 1972 - 1979, List of past Emmerdale characters 1980 - 1989, etc in the same way as for example Guiding Light (2000-2009) but having this just for characters and then separate pages covering major plot developments. This would not prevent pages for long established and notable characters who are no longer in the show.

I would say that the above is more in accordance with the Wikipedia fiction policy which says that characters should begin in the main article and then be spun off into a list of characters page and then further given their own pages if they warrant this. I think structuring of this nature would lead to higher quality articles and we would then only have individual character articles which someone was willing to develop. It would make it much easier to try and get all of the articles on this project up to the GA standard (as GA will never be given to characters in fiction where notability can not be properly established which to be fair is the majority of the current emmerdale characters).

I would also suggest working on some new templates for character articles to try and standardise the ones which are spun off. Personally I would like to get rid of the Family section all together. If the information isn't notable enough to include in the main body of the article then I don't think it needs to be maintained as a list. When I am going through I plan to remove all of the Great Grandfather (adopted) style categories but would like to debate the whole purpose of a family section. Might leave this for another day though as my first target it to tag all of the talk pages with Wikiproject Emmerdale tags and sort out the category tags on the articles before moving on to merging the pages if we can get some form of agreement. --Amxitsa 14:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more! There are too many people recently making character articles for characters who are only in the programme short-term or as you said, lack any strong notability to warrant a page of their own. I think making a separate page consolidating all smaller, less notable characters would be a good start and eliminating any pages which are then in excess. Maybe past character pages could be consolidated into categories rather than creating more listcruft? Bungle44 14:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Episode coverage

The WikiProject Television episode coverage taskforce have recently been working on a review process for episode articles. There are a rash of articles about individual episodes which fail notability, and are unlikely to ever reach such requirements. Many contributors are unaware of the specific guidelines to assess notability in episode pages: Wikipedia:Television episodes. We have expanded these guidelines to make them more helpful and explanatory, and we invite you to read the guidelines, and make any comments on its talk page. After much discussion, we have created a proposed review process for dealing with problem articles. See: Wikipedia:Television article review process. We invite discussion of this process on its talk page. General comments about this whole process are welcome at the episode coverage taskforce talkpage. Thanks! Gwinva 10:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] duplicate character template?

I notice there are two Emmerdale character templates. There is “Template:Emmerdale Character” (upper-case "C") and “Template:Emmerdale character” (lower-case "c"). The first template shows an example of itself in action, but lacks a noinclude sample section. The second has a noinclude sample section, but doesn't show an example of itself in action. --EarthFurst 00:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've redirected the inactive template to the active one. Bungle (talk • contribs) 08:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Granny Hopwood

Out of all the characters I have seen mentioned, you haven't even listed her as a minor character. Just a notice. I searched for her cause the actress who played her (Pattie something) is my neighbor Straight Edge PXK 17:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dr Clare Scott up for deletion

Tagged for deletion on grounds of non-notability...I have no idea how big or small a character she was so I'll leave it to you guys to contest if appropriate. Paulbrock (talk) 22:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] WikiProjectEmmerdale: Articles of unclear notability

Hello,

there are currently 20 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)