Talk:Characters of Casualty

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Minor[edit]

Made a minoy typo correction in the Charlie Fairhead section 82.34.107.178 (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

infoboxes?[edit]

Should the casualty lists start to use infoboxes? Wanted to get peoples opinions before i made any changes. If everyone agreed i could do add them in. Opinions?D4nnyw14 (talk) 13:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Danny - my preference would be not to use infoboxes, just because I modelled the page format here and at Characters of Holby City after the FL and FA equivalents (Characters of Carnivàle, Characters of Final Fantasy VIII, List of Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow and Dawn of Sorrow characters, List of characters in the Uncharted series, List of Naruto characters, List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters), none of which use infoboxes either. A lot of the sections also need the plot details reigning in, so as a purely aesthetic issue, there's the possibility of infoboxes introducing whitespace between entries. That's obviously a secondary concern compared to the first, though! Frickative 14:26, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok then, i'll leave them unless anyone else replies. I know and sources adding. I plan on adding some when i get chance and cutting down plot.D4nnyw14 (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just Cleaned Up[edit]

Dont know if you havent noticed but I just did a major cleanup, addition of references, plus many fixes upon fixes, :) Ive tagged the top, the plot for each character is very low and outdated, please update :) MayhemMario 21:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mario, it's really great that you've done so much work on the article - as I'm sure you've noticed from how out-of-date it is, it's often neglected! I do wish you'd joined the above discussion about infoboxes rather than adding them, but as it's done now, could I ask you to change to the standard {{Infobox character}}, as Casualty isn't a soap opera? And give yourself a big pat on the back for your hard work yesterday! Frickative 18:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, one more thing, in case it comes in handy for you in future - per WP:LEADSENTENCE, list articles shouldn't begin with "This is a list of..." or similar. I think the EastEnders list leads probably all need amending on that basis. Frickative 22:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ive changed the infoboxes, not much was lost TBH. Thanks, Charlie should have his only page. :/ ANYway... Thanks, :) MayhemMario 22:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The page looks much better, ive also thought about working on it and adding OOU info but haven't got round to it yet. Charlie is definitely notable enough for his own page though. D4nnyw14 (talk) 22:25, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I only have a limited amount of time lately, so I grabbed the latest issue of IS, used all sources from that; got two from DS, so.. yeah. I was thinking of enquiring into the Past list and this list to be merged, TBH, Casualty's dosent have that many characters.. so... yeah. :P MayhemMario 22:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think there are a load of past characters not listed. Look at List of Casualty Characters, so many former characters aren't listed. I created the past characters as otherwise characters were just being wiped from the page after they left. D4nnyw14 (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm not keen on dividing character lists into 'past' and 'present' (gives things a recentist slant, and is ever changing), I don't think merging the two is the way to go - just take a look at the painful length of Characters of Holby City, and imagine another thirteen years worth of characters on top! Charlie should definitely have an independent article, and I've often thought of starting one, but with 25 years of history, it's hard to know where to start. Frickative 22:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ETA: Oh and thanks for changing the infoboxes, Mario :) If that's what prompted your enquiry at the template page, adding:
| lbl1 = Spinoff(s) | data1 = ''[[Holby City]]'' (2010)
does the job. Frickative 22:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that Frickative. :) What im trying to get at is, Characters of Casulty sounds like an overall summary of all the Casualty characters. We could do lists, 2012, 2011, ect, but would we feel them up? Maybe rename this to List of present Casualty characters? Im not sure... :/ MayhemMario 21:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think a rename would be good. Do you mean fill them up or feel them up? ;) D4nnyw14 (talk) 21:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We'll wait for Frickative to comment, and yes it was 'fill', :D MayhemMario 21:53, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use of infobox soap character 2[edit]

I think infobox soap character 2 should be used for this page because it gives more information about the characters. Besides, it is used for sitcoms such as Only Fools and Horses. Also, Casualty is a sort-of soap opera because it's on almost every week. And one of the categories on the Casualty page is 'British television soap operas'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boushenheiser (talk • contribs) 21:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox soap character 2 is tailored to EastEnders and Coronation Street-esque soaps, where intricate family details would overwhelm an infobox with just a |family= parameter. Casualty is primarily a medical drama, and while some storylines do involve the families of staff members, they're not the programme's predominant theme. The standard Infobox character can cover all relevant information perfectly adequately IMO. Frickative 14:46, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup[edit]

You may I have noticed I have been cleaning up and editing the page as well as adding sections. I have just been editing and added another section to it (Caleb Knight) under the IP address; 178.78.114.180 It signed me out and I hadn't seen it.

Hope you have liked my work so far and I will be completing the clean up and update later by adding Tess' affair with Fletch to Tess Bateman, adding the section 'Lofty' and adding episode refs to sentences in the different sections. --#Soaper1234 (talk) 11:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really necessary...[edit]

...to have the actors names included in brackets after every mention of their character? Is it even necessary to blue link every current character's name? This is the character page after all, that information is already on the page for the most part. Leemorrison (talk) 07:54, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Repositioned new thread from first to last on page. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 10:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Robyn/Max relation[edit]

Although I'm sure they've always been referred to as stepbrother and sister on the show, Max's mum has just made reference to "Max and Robyn's father" in a red button episode.

Also should events that haven't played out on screen yet (Louise returning to nursing for example) be on the page?

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Characters of Casualty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:24, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Characters of Casualty. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:08, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very very long.. Is the level of detail here really necessary?[edit]

I have never watched the show, but this article is crazy long - almost 300k bytes. Do we really need all this detail? Additionally, wide swaths of text are uncited and so deleting them (if they stay that way) wouldn't be so unreasonable. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 22:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@QueensanditsCrazy: Well, the programme has been running since 1986, and has a fairly large core cast, especially in recent years. This article is solely focused on the characters, so all of the prose is relevant. And rather than deleting unsourced text, just place a citation needed on them and allow editors a chance to source them. – DarkGlow (talk) 10:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree to let editors provide sources. I probably won't be deleting anything anytime soon, but (i should have said this in my first message) a lot of this article seems to be getting into the plot of the show or of individual episodes, and so I don't think it necessarily belongs on this article. Maybe a lot of the plot points could be moved to pages about individual episodes or individual seasons of the show. For example, in the first character Jez's section, the final paragraph ("The 'shot-in-one-take' episode "One" opens with...") I think contains way excessive detail, and actually makes no point or information about Jez's character, personality, or relationships. That paragraph should be deleted or a new detail about his character or personality changes or is developed. The article should be about those things about characters, not about plot points of indibidual episodes or arcs, and not a record of what each character does throughout the course of the show. What do you think? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 16:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@QueensanditsCrazy: The article is long because, as DarkGlow states, it is about the characters who have appeared in a show spanning 34 years. All the prose is relevant, but it is always encouraged for character articles to be created (providing there is appropriate development and sources) so the page can be reduced in size. While it is safe to say Jez's section could be summarised better, parts of it are relevant to the character and therefore, fine to be included. It is also worth noting that many character have not got a section in here too, so it could be bigger. Soaper1234 - talk 14:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia article sizes are evaluated by characters of article-space text. References are not included. I found about 165k characters, which is about 165kb or far less than the 300kb described by QueensanditsCrazy. In particular, Wikipedia:Article_size#Content_removal asserts that that even if the article ought to be made smaller, content removal should not be the immediate option. It appears that QueensanditsCrazy has found a list somewhere of the largest articles by total article size and desires to remove content to make them fit a preferred size (other articles criticized on size being HBO, University of Scranton buildings and landmarks and Door County, Wisconsin). This is less-than-ideal because the size guidelines on WP articles do not apply to references. Any approach using a list of articles by total size looking to remove information will necessarily target better-referenced articles the most, since references contain words too. There are many articles on Wikipedia with 165k characters or more of articlespace; there is no need for haste with this or any others.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 17:11, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Characters_of_Casualty&oldid=1212512697"