Talk:List of EastEnders characters/Archive 3

Brenda Boyle
Why is Brenda Boyle included as a member of the present cast on this list? There is no source that suggests she is a permanent character on EastEnders. I believe she is returning as a guest character but shes not permanent to my knowledge? Bleaney (talk) 22:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Recurring characters
Please keep updated: -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 21:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Marissa Moore
Currently, Articles for deletion/Marissa Moore is up for deletion, the material from that page is found here: {| class="wikitable collapsible collapsed" !align="left" width="700"|Marissa Moore {{Pre2| {{Infobox EastEnders character }} Marissa Moore is a fictional character in the popular BBC One soap opera EastEnders. She is played by Finn Atkins, and made her first on-screen appearance on 13 January 2009.
 * character_name= Marissa Moore
 * image=[[image:Moore, marissa.JPG|200px]]
 * actor_name= Finn Atkins
 * introducer= Diederick Santer
 * years= 2009
 * first= 13 January 2009
 * last=
 * dob=1992
 * classification=Present; regular
 * status= Single
 * occupation= Masseuse

Storyline
Marissa was first seen in Walford on 13 January 2009, working at the newly opened Gilly's Massage Parlour. The new massage parlour was met with opposition from Peggy Mitchell and Dot Branning, amongst other residents, but Marissa found a friend in teen tearaway Jay Brown who took an interest in her and bought her an expensive fur coat. He carried on spending money on her, paying her to spend time with him. Billy Mitchell entered his flat, only to find Jay in the lounge reading Lord of the Flies, followed by the entrance of Marissa. He immediately made Marissa leave, shouting at Jay that he can't be friends with a prostitute.

}} Ikip (talk) 21:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * }

Departing
I realise that Departing characters are supposed to be a sub cat of present, which is fine, but separating them from the main present cast list is misleading. Dawn and Gary wont be leaving for months, yet they will be classified as departing until they go in the Autumn. I think they should either remain in the present list as well as appearing in the departing list. Or we should find a new way to display the information, perhaps in a table with colour codes and keys for departing etc. Thoughts?  GunGagdin Moan 13:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't really like the idea of colour coding. I don't mind them being in two lists on the page. I just did what we used to do a year ago - assuming that we hadn't changed! :) anemone  │  projectors  13:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Procedure hasnt changed, what you did was right, it has just always been something that irritated me, because it's like they're deemed no longer present characters, and they lose their place in the list heriarchy which is done according to duration. Sean Slater was in departing for over a year, for instance! Just seems misleading to me. But repeating the info is fine by me :)  GunGagdin Moan 13:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Sean took a long time to depart! It's fine to put them in two places, because they are both present and departing. anemone  │  projectors  13:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK have included them twice. So nice to have you back, you're the only one who answers my discussions on EE talk pages. Even if it's disagreement, it's good to discuss, but I work in Psychology so I probably would say that :)  GunGagdin Moan 16:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you think Trampikey would return if he knew I was back? Although I wonder about some of the IPs that edit - ar they him? You're not a psychologist though are you? They twist everything. anemone  │  projectors  16:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Trampikey still edits as far as I know, not seen him around recently but he could be on holiday, loads of people take it now because they are forced to take it before the new financial year or lose it. I havent been on here often so I dont know how much he edits, but his name still pops up on my watchlist every so often, but I havent had a conversation with him in ages, guess we both have less free time than we used to :( You coming back has inspired me to get more involved again, so maybe it will do for him.

I'm a trainee in clinical psychology :) Twist everything??! how very dare you! :)  GunGagdin Moan 16:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Clinical is ok. I'll let you off for that :) anemone  │  projectors  17:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Ian and Nick
I've semi-protected this page due to the Ian/Nick edit war. Can we discuss the order here? AnemoneProjectors (what?) 10:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * What happened? What order is in question regarding Ian/Nick? Maybe I could help. Newtree21 (talk) 20:28, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * We have the list of characters in order of their first appearance. Ian and Nick were both in the first episode. There was an edit war where the order of the names were being changed. Do we know who appeared on screen first out of Ian Beale and Nick Cotton? AnemoneProjectors (what?) 20:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Its lucky I have the first episode (along with the rest of February to June 1985) on DVD. Im pretty sure Nick appeared first but I can look over it for you if you like? Newtree21 (talk) 20:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It would certainly help resolve the issue. Thanks. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 21:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I've checked it over and it was indeed Nick who appeared first:

First episode in order of first appearance:
 * Den Watts
 * Ali Osman
 * Arthur Fowler
 * Reg Cox
 * Ethel Skinner
 * Pauline Fowler
 * Dr. Harold Legg
 * Lou Beale
 * Saeed Jeffery
 * Naima Jeffery
 * Angie Watts
 * Nick Cotton – 11 minutes 30 seconds in
 * Sue Osman
 * Pete Beale
 * Kathy Beale
 * Hassan Osman
 * Sharon Watts
 * Ian Beale – 16 minutes 35 seconds in
 * Michelle Fowler
 * Mark Fowler

Hope this solves the problem Newtree21 (talk) 21:26, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That should hopefully end the edit war once the page protection period ends. Thanks :) AnemoneProjectors (what?) 21:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't mention it. :) Also, Al Jenkins needs adding to the present characters section EDIT: Oh you've done it lol Newtree21 (talk) 21:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I haven't been changing the page but other wikipedians consider Ian Beale as the longest serving character because he has spent more time on the soap. If they change again protect the page.--Spock a (talk) 17:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It's already semi-protected. I think because Nick has come and gone several times, it seems right for Ian to go first, but as Nick did appear first he should be first on the list. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 18:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Sooner or later Nick Cotton will be gone so Ian will be in his rightful place.--Spock a (talk) 19:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Surely it should go by which was credited first on the original episode credits? In which case it should be Ian seeing as he was eighth character to be credited and Nick was the fourteenth.AJ21SW (talk) 19:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps, yes. Any other thoughts from any other people? AnemoneProjectors (what?) 21:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it should go by first appearance, if Nick was seen before Ian then he should be first in the list due to the fact that goes by first appearance.--Elliethomson (talk) 21:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * First appearance on screen would be better. Characters are not always (if at all) listed in order of first appearance on the credits. In fact in most cases I think the name of the character to appear first on the credits nowadays is usually the character(s) the episode ends with. Newtree21 (talk) 11:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, the credits are normally in order of last appeared in the episode. I think they should be in order of who appeared on screen first. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 11:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Named extras
Are Harry, Ina, Maude and Marie background characters with jobs or are they just there to make Walford look busy?--Spock a (talk) 19:06, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Marie works in the cafe, Ina I think is a market trader, Harry and Maude I don't know about. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 19:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Guest Characters
What ever happened to the Guest Characters section? A lot of characters lately have been appearing in the show for brief periods of time. Characters such as Bushra and Parveen are surely considered Guest and not Recurring? -- lgx4 09:46, June 15, 2009 (BST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.54.240 (talk) 08:46, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know. The problem with Bushra, Parveen and Ellis is we don't know when they've gone, so I've just been updating their last appered date each time they appear. But we don't know when we should be moving them from this page to the past characters' page. I think the recurring characters section includes the guest characters, I don't mind either way if we reintroduce the section or not. See what others think. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:20, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather it was re-introduced because on many occasions there are characters that vaguely appear in the shown... adding to that list is James from Monday and Tuesday's episode. -- lgx4 18:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I think guest should be brought back too.  GunGagdin Moan 14:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Theo Kelly
Has he left the show? I notice he has been removed from the current cast list on here and his article has gone back to being part of the minor characters 2009 list? 92.20.103.247 (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Theo Kelly (EastEnders). AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Tanya Branning/Jo Joyner
Should she be listed as departing, as she won't be leaving the cast, she'll just be going for maternity leave? I think we should only be listing actors who are actually permanently leaving the cast in this section, rather than those who are on leave or suspended. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree.  Who niverse 93  talk?  13:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ryan - Last name confirmed as Dean
Ryan's surname is Dean. Confirmed on the official site

http://www.bbc.co.uk/eastenders

It says on the homepage: News Meet the new bad boy, Ryan Dean

92.20.103.247 (talk) 14:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not ideal but it'll do. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * But according to this http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00lsvks he is called Ryan Malloy Harleyamber (talk) 00:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe it should be reverted to just 'Ryan' until the BBC say anything else. I personally don't think it will be 'Ryan Dean' because that was Nathan's surname and it's most likely Debra was not married to him at the time of having Ryan.  Who niverse 93  talk?  00:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I was thinking the exact same thing about Nathan. I'd definitely go along with those credits, as they're actual credits. We should change it to Ryan Malloy. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Boris
Can we discuss the inclusion of Boris Johnson on this page instead of reverting and shouting in edit summaries please. Thank you. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, personally, I think the anon was right: He's not a character! Stephenb (Talk) 09:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * He's still scripted like a character, and I've always thought that makes him not totally "himself". I think he ought to be listed somewhere. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * He is appearing in the show, his lines will be scripted, the only difference to any other is that he will be playing a version of himself rather than a fictional character, therefore I think he should be included. If it matters so much to Trampikey, create a new section at the bottom of the page. Either way, it's significant enough to include on the list. AJ21SW (talk) 10:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. If he is scripted, then he basically is an upcoming character, he's just playing himself that's all.  Who niverse 93  talk?  10:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Mr Lister and Kenny Morris
Can we move them from recurring characters to past characters? Yes they sometimes bring back minor characters such as Jamie Stewart but we don't know when it'll be until they've been and gone - and like when Jamie reappeared, I think we should just move them up the past list if they ever return. I'd say the same for Reverend Stevens but as he's the local vicar he's bound to return for christenings, weddings and funerals, of which there are many. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Go for it, I have no idea who either of them are! I am weeks behind on EE.  GunGagdin Moan 20:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither have appeared for aaaaaages. Mr Lister is the market inspector. Kenny Morris is a police officer who appears sometimes when the police are involved. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think my point is that we should reserve recurring characters for those that we know are likely to appear again. There's a chance that Mr Lister and Kenny Morris will never appear again. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Should Bushra go to past now as well? It's been almost two months since her last appearance, that may have been it. AJ21SW (talk) 23:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought about her but was expecting her to appear again because she was meant to be giving the Masoods more business. If it's been that long, then it probably happened off screen. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Liz Owen
Hi has Kate Williams (Liz Owen) left? Her character page says her last appearence was on 1 Dec and she disappeared from the regular list on this page but returned. Can we find out? Thanks. I love this page by the way as do all EastEnders fans. Good to keep abreast of the goings and comings Cheers, Nickosi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.115.116 (talk) 00:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad as a fan you find it helpful. As for Liz (it's Liz Turner, by the way), I'm not sure. We assumed she had gone, then people said we shouldn't assume. But I think we should assume she's still in the cast until we know for sure. For example, we assumed Syd would not return from Canada but she is, so we had to revert all our changes. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, and for pointing out my mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.175.109 (talk) 14:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * She's been moved to past characters now but I'm not going to undo the edits now. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:55, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Tanya's Return?
Nowhere does the cited article state that Tanya is returning --Maurice45 (talk) 20:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's true actually. I hadn't noticed. But she's just on maternity leave. Another source needs to be found. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:58, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * She is actually appearing in the Christmas Day episode, so technically she hasn't even departed yet. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Upcoming and returning minor characters
I don't know if any of these are worth listing but here are some updates:


 * 17/12 - Louise Hills and Andy Henderson (2007 others)
 * 28/12 - Jill Marsden, Myra Sim, PC Adams (2008 others). also DC Hughes who according to IMDb appeared in 2007 and 2008 but we don't seem to have that one listed anywhere.
 * 29/12 - Bushra Abbasi, her daughter Zulekha (listed in others), and someone called Afia.
 * 31/12 - Afia, Bushra and Inzamam Ahmed
 * 1/1 - Inzamam, Bushra, Zulekha, Afia, Imam Ali (2009 others), Ali Inzamam (but credited as Ali Ahmed)
 * 4/1 - Marsden

Some are listed here, some aren't. Maybe some should be, I don't know. I got the information from the BBC website. Work your way on from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00pcnfm if you want to see for yourself. It's also where I found out that Tanya and Lauren are appearing on Christmas Day. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, I found out Afia is Bushra's cousin . AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:16, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Dotty Cotton
Does "Elsewhere, Dot says a tearful goodbye to her granddaughter, Dotty, as the girl's real mother comes to collect her" mean that the character will not return or is it an assumption? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Glenda Mitchell
Glenda is down as a recurring character, is she going to become a regular? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.166.60 (talk) 19:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It was said that she appeared in only 9 episodes. Digital Spy had her leaving in the last episode she appeared in recently, but an interview said she would return for a couple of episodes in the spring, which is why we have her as recurring and not departed. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

thank you, it's a sahme shes not gonna become a regular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.50.62 (talk) 09:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * She might become a regular, you never know. I hope not though! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Jim Branning
shouldn't he be moved to recurring as he only appears now and again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.50.62 (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No because he was a regular and he will soon be a regular again. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Dotty
is dotty leaving eastenders as her mum sandy arrives on February 16th. --86.165.186.203 (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I asked that already. It doesn't confirm that the character leaves, though she might. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:03, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Billie, Carol, Robbie & Sonia
Are they back for good or just for the wedding? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.25.105 (talk) 10:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Billie and Carol are back for some time, as I've read up on some of their storylines coming up in March. As for Sonia and Robbie, I don't know if they will still be around, but I would assume that they would want to go back to their own lives. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.27.12 (talk) 17:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

According to the credits on bbc.co.uk-Robbie and Sonia do not even appear in the live episode but Carol and billie do Brianwazere 15:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Eastenders website
They seriously need to update there characters sections becuase they've still got Owen, Archie and Dr. Al down as been in the show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.37.74 (talk) 17:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * They haven't updated it since they relaunched the website in December or was it November? We're still waiting for the old character profiles to be put back. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Eastenders 25th anniversery
Should it be noted on a characters wikipage storyline section that they appeared in the 25th anniversary episode? Brianwazere 15:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably not, no. In fact the majority of characters won't have anything from that episode worth adding to their storylines. Zainab, for example, appears but has no lines. We'll just continue the storylines, and as we don't give episode dates, there's no need to say it's the 25th anniversary episode. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I have just realised that alot the characters included in thee bbc credits on the website were no even around during tonights episode or last nights e.g Jay was listed but never appeared Brianwazere 22:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Abi was the first on the list. They basically credited every character, apart from Patrick, Mo and Libby. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Marie
Does anyone think she should be added to one of our lists of characters by year - if we can find out when she first appeared? The reason is she features a little but more than normal this week, with photos of her 2-year-old child being shown and Ian is going to get a birthing DVD from her. anemoneprojectors  talk  12:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, according to imdb, she's been credited once! anemoneprojectors   talk  12:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Connor and Kylie
shouldn't they be down as recurring characters as they have appeared a few times now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.187.254 (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes they should. They are appearing until April. anemoneprojectors   talk  18:54, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Connor is now listed as a recurring character AND a departing character, which is right? And is Kylie departing? Bleaney (talk) 01:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Current characters who are departing are still listed as current (in this case recurring). I forgot that they were listed as recurring characters, so forgot to remove Kylie from there last night. Yesterday was her last episode and tonight is Connor's last episode. anemoneprojectors   talk  09:39, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Zoe Slater
Apprantly, according to HEAT this week Zoe Slater is set to return for the departure of Charlie around Xmas time. Is this true? Find out please. Ta —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.87.143.3 (talk) 14:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it's not true. It was reported in one newspaper last week that she was in talks and then officially denied by the BBC. anemoneprojectors   talk  16:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Jay
Has jay left because he hasn't appeared for sometime now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.45.73 (talk)
 * No. Anemone  Projectors  10:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact, he's in it next week. If he had gone, a) we'd have had an annoucement in the news that the character had been axed and b) he'd have had a departure stoyline. Anemone  Projectors  23:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Departing and Returning
i think that the list of cast that are returning and leaving should go like this because it makes more sence?


 * Departing characters


 * Returning characters


 * Perhaps you should bring this up on the affected article's talk page instead of this one. Anemone  Projectors  22:42, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * ok then do you think its possible to change it like that or are you keeping it the same --Sheep 2009 (talk) 23:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The above was moved from Talk:EastEnders. Copying my last reply here.
 * Well, we shouldn't change from the standard wikitable class. I don't think we need the role column, I presume you want it for 'Regular', 'Recurring' or 'Guest'?. Thing is, most of the time we just don't know. Kim Fox might be in it long term or just a few episodes, we haven't been told. We've rejected the duration column in the past and I think it's pretty clear that we still don't want it. I'm working on a list of cast though that does include the durations. I'm not sure when I'll make it live since I've been working on it for years! I'm trying to reference everyone in the list first. Anemone  Projectors  23:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ok then thank you for letting me know.--Sheep 2009 (talk) 09:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Departing characters section
Does the departing characters section of this list really need a 'previous actor/s' column? Any previous actors of these characters will be in the main body of the list after all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bleaney (talk • contribs)
 * Hmm, not sure. It's there because we used to take departing characters out of the present characters section. Anemone  Projectors  23:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * But we dont now (which I agree with) So I dont see the need for it now. Bleaney (talk) 23:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, it's only one name, but I think it's helpful for completeness. Plus I wouldn't want Jo Warne being forgotten when we move Peggy from present to past as I always cut from here and paste there (and forget to remove the character from the present characters section!). Anemone  Projectors  23:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Lucy Beale
The BBC have now confirmed that Melissa Suffield is leaving - http://www.bbc.co.uk/eastenders/news/100601-melissa-suffield.shtml

The title of the news story is Lucy is leaving, though the actual news story only talks about Melissa leaving. How should we proceed? Bleaney (talk) 14:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * See Talk:Lucy Beale. Anemone  Projectors  14:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Mr Lister
Is there any reason why Mr Lister has been removed from the recurring characters section? I don't think there has been any official confirmation that Mr Lister will not reappear in the future, or that there will be a new market inspector in EastEnders, so why has he been removed? Bleaney (talk) 15:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Because we don't know if or when he will appear again. Anemone  Projectors  17:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * See . Anemone  Projectors  17:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Mr Lister appeared just a couple of weeks ago in conncetion to Syed trying to rent a market stall. I dont see why he should not be included and the likes of Sal Martin and Reverend Stevens should. He has appeared more recently than them after all. I am not looking for some extreme removal of all recurring characters here, I just think Mt Lister has kjust as much right to be there as Sal or Stevens. Bleaney (talk) 17:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I think we should either include Mr Lister or remove Sal and Reverend Stevens, so if you think we should include Mr Lister than feel free to move Mr Lister from the list of past characters to the list of recurring characters. Anemone  Projectors  17:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I will add Mr Lister back to the list, as I agree with you... all or nothing. I feel though that we may soon have to have a larger, wide-ranging discussion about the recurring characters section, as there seem to be quite a few issues here vis a vis sourcing and verification Bleaney (talk) 17:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * This whole article could do with sources just to back up all the entries. I've been working on a list of cast for aaaaaaages which I might move to the main article space when I've sourced every item! Anemone  Projectors  18:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Good luck with that, sounds like a beast of a job! It may be very hard to maintain a recurring characters section though, or even a named extras section, if all entires are to be sourced, and I kinda like the recurring lot! Bleaney (talk) 18:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks! This is my article if you're interested. I'm only including major roles though, so a lot of recurring characters aren't there. Sourcing for extras would be tricky, though if/when they're credited, the episode on BBC Programmes can be the source (as it is with Marie). Anemone  Projectors  18:20, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * What about doing the same for Imam Ali? Anemone  Projectors  19:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It would seem fair enough. Imam Ali has appeared on more than one occasion, and his occupation as local imam means he's just as likely to re-appear as Reverend Stevens is Bleaney (talk) 20:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Kim Fox
Is Kim Fox a permanent cast member, returning, or recurring? She's not on the list at all at the moment? Bleaney (talk) 18:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I got the impression she was recurring, but maybe I'm wrong? Ooh, Fruity    Ooh, Chatty  18:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Someone put on her section in the 2009 list that she had made her last appearance, so I carried on and removed her from here and put her as past. I think she was just making guest appearances and I've not seen her name in credits for upcoming episodes. Denise sent her away. There's nothing to suggest she's going to appear again. She was specially brought back with an announcement, but they never announce Aunt Sal's returns because she's recurring, for example. Anemone  Projectors  19:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Reading the Digitalspy article on her return It would seem to suggest she is a full-time character. Or at least around for a while. Surely she should be on this list? Bleaney (talk) 19:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * AP doesnt like spoilers, so do not read on AP. I heard she was meant to be a victim of the god botherer. No reliable printed source tho.  GunGagdin Moan 20:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Bleaney I think you're right. They developed her personality and none of that has been seen yet. Please revert me :) Anemone  Projectors  20:13, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have now added Kim Fox. The Digitalspy article quotes BBC sources when it says When Dexter fails to return with her, Denise is left wondering where he is and it soon transpires that Kim is running away from something - or someone... We havn't seen this play out yet. And yes, the article does pad out her character. So I think this is confirmation (As much as we ever have it) that she is here to stay Bleaney (talk) 20:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * While we're here, I note that Ritchie Scott has been and gone, but should we leave her as a recurring character as she's Phil's lawyer and bound to keep appearing?
 * If she has appearedf recently then it would seem fair Bleaney (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * She was in tonight's episode. Anemone  Projectors  21:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Page Layout
Could we not have a lay out like the emmerdale and coronation street one that shows the year when the cast joined the show and when they have returned Bankhallbretherton (talk) 19:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This has been discussed lots already, very few seem to want it (including me). Anemone  Projectors  20:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Marie from the cafe
Does anyone know when she first appeared? She gets lines next week and she has a last name - Evans. She appears with Derek Evans too so maybe they're married. I think we should give her a section in a list but which list? Anemone Projectors  11:31, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I pointed this out to Kris Green from Digital Spy by the way and he's going to "ask the questions tomorrow". It could be an error and that's not meant to be her last name at all. Anemone  Projectors  11:50, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * (just noticed I already asked about this above hehe.) Anemone  Projectors  11:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess her last name being Evans was just a coincidence, but I'd still like to know when she first appeared so we can list her. She was first credited on 12 June 2007... Anemone  Projectors  12:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Jay Byrd
Question: Should we list Jay Byrd as a "previous actor" for Grace Olubunmi? It's tricky because she wasn't in EastEnders (only E20), but played the same character. Anemone Projectors  20:04, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I dont think so. It would be the same as listing the actors who played the younger versions of Pat and Mo in the soap bubble they did a few years ago. Technically they didnt appear in EE proper, so she should't be included. Bleaney (talk) 22:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point. I'll continue to revert her addition. Thinking about it, some of the "soap bubble" characters are listed on the list of past characters (mostly as red links). Should we remove them? Anemone  Projectors  22:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It depends wether we consider them part of EE proper, or spin-offs? it is debatable either way I feel Bleaney (talk) 22:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, if we're not including other actors playing regular characters in the spin-offs, why would we include characters that only appeared in the spin-offs? Yeah it's debatable. Anemone  Projectors  22:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Denise is NOT leaving EastEnders.
DigitalSpy spoilers state that "Patrick mourns Denise's death" -- however, that does not necessarily mean she REALLY is dead. It means that Patrick mourns what he THINKS is Denise's death".

Remember in February 2009? The Vic was holding a memorial for Gary's "suicide"? And Gary was not even dead?

And anyhow, there's nothing that suggests she's leaving. No news or anything.

The main point is, SHE IS NOT LEAVING (yet)!--The Ultimate Koopa (talk) 20:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


 * The discussion is at Talk:Denise Johnson. Anemone  Projectors  20:55, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Ben Mitchell
Should we list Ben as returning or leave him as ongoing, seeing as there is currently no actor in the role (presuming that today actually was Ben's last episode, which I did do). Anemone Projectors  20:14, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Personally I'd put him as returning, seeing as he's off for five months. He's technically not present at the moment. Ooh, Fruity    Ooh, Chatty  22:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, and it seems odd having "TBA" for the current actor. Or do we just leave him under characters being recast? Or remove him from there and put TBA in the returning section? Anemone  Projectors  22:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Ben hasn't left yet so why does it say actor 'none'? http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2/eastenders/i304809/eastenders-4044-2010-07-30-peggy-phil-and-ben.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.89.117 (talk) 07:28, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Change it if it's wrong! I thought yesterday was Charlie Jones's last episode, like I said above. Anemone  Projectors  10:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * So stuff is being edited based on what you think even with perfectly valid sources out there on the net to the contrary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.82.241 (talk) 21:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I did ask to be corrected if I was wrong. I rarely read spoilers and I never look at the spoiler photos. Like I said, you could have just changed it without complaining. If there was a source that said "this is Charlie Jones's last episode" then we wouldn't have a problem. I have just checked though and we have Charlie Jones until the autumn. So I am sorry. However, they did say Ben would go away for a while before returning with a new face. Many people probably thought when he was sentenced, that was his last episode, because often characters aren't seen after being jailed, especially if they (or the actor) are leaving. Anemone  Projectors  21:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Sharon Marshall said today that tonight is Charlie Jones's last episode. Anemone Projectors  11:58, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Cal Childs
shouldn't he be down as recurring? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.137.93 (talk) 20:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If you know he's in more episodes then sure. Anemone  Projectors  22:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I saw on Digital Spy that he's in one more episode, but I don't think that makes him recurring (though I added him there). Do you know he's going to be in more? Anemone  Projectors  23:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * well if there following bens story inside then im guessing he'll be making appearances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.46.241 (talk) 14:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Guessing isn't good enough. But we can leave him there for now. However, at the moment we only know he's making one more appearance for sure. Anemone  Projectors  14:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Sharon Marshall said today that tonight is Charlie Jones's last episode, so it'll be Cal's as well, meaning he's in two episodes. Anemone Projectors  11:58, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Bianca
As Patsy Palmer is leaving for maternity leave, I feel we should add some kind of note to say her departure is only temporary, as readers of this article may be lead to believe she is leaving for good. Once she's gone, we move her to returning, and no need for a note. Anyone agree? Anemone Projectors  12:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Sounds like a good idea to me :) Frickative  12:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Cool, but how should we present it? Anemone  Projectors  13:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry AP, missed this yesterday. Perhaps the easiest way to do it would be to fill out the quote parameter in the reference that says she's leaving, so when readers click on it they'll see:




 * The other option would be including a 'Notes' column in the table, which would be more immediately obvious to readers, but might look a bit odd as the rest of the column would be blank and none of the other tables have one. Frickative  15:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd prefer a note over the quote in the refence, though maybe we can use that as well. The only other thing I can think of is to say something like "Bianca Jackson (temporary) " in the table. Anemone  Projectors  15:53, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
 * She shouldn't be listed at all. She's not departing the show as she is coming back. Simple as. When off-screen she can be added to returning characters. Ben Mitchell was never listed as a departing character, for a recent example. U-Mos (talk) 11:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * But she is departing. Just because she's coming back doesn't mean she's not departing. We didn't think Ben would be off-screen for very long, which is why we didn't list him as departing, but Tanya was gone for aaages and Bianca will probably be gone the same amount of time as her. Anemone  Projectors  12:01, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Rainie Cross
Can she be moved to the recurring characters section as she is now appearing? I'd do it myself but the article is protected. Bleaney (talk) 20:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops! Yeah, I'll do it. Anemone  Projectors  20:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Daphne Fox
I read that at the end of the Lucas edition of Eastenders Revealed show a couple of weeks ago, it was stated that Kim and Denise's other sister Daphne, who made a small appearance a few weeks earlier. Is this correct? Should we add her to the returning characters section if true? I would but I am not registered. 174.89.235.32 (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)samusek2


 * It was stated that Daphne what? Would return? Where did you read it? Was it a reliable source? Anemone  Projectors  18:19, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I was sidetracked there a bit. I heard that, at the end of the last Eastenders Revealed dealing with Lucas' crimes a couple of weeks ago, apparently someone, I believe Diane Parish, said that Daphne Fox would be returning to the Square alongside her two sisters. I did not see the particular special, though and I was wondering if some Wikipedian had seen the show in question and could confirm what was implied on the particular special. Iknow I read it on Digital Spy forums but people said that it was mentioned on an Eastenders special on BBC Three, so I just wanted to double check with other people. 174.89.235.32 (talk) 21:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC)samusek2


 * I didn't see it I'm afraid, I was going to watch one of the repeats but comepletely forgot. User:Frickative usually downloads them so she can use them in Wikipedia articles, but I don't know if she's got that one yet. I don't think we can say she's coming back if you only saw people talking about it on a forum, so we'll have to wait a bit. Anemone  Projectors  21:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Ooh, I actually watched it when it was on, but I couldn't remember whether that was said. I've flicked through on iPlayer and it definitely seems to be implied - here about 41 minutes in, if anyone wants to check. They don't outright say 'Daphne is coming back' but they do talk about her in future tense. Frickative  21:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Just had a look at it. They dont't in anyway confirm that Daphne is coming back. In fact they could have been talking BEFORE we saw Daphne on-screen for Denise's funeral. Bleaney (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That would be rather odd, given that they talk about Daphne in the context of Libby/Chelsea leaving and what the future holds for the Foxs beyond that, which didn't happen until after she appeared. Frickative  22:03, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Narrator: So with Denise left without her husband and her children, can the Fox family ever recover?
 * Parish: So as those little buds have disappeared and faded, new buds sprout, in the colourful form of Aunty Kim -
 * Treadwell-Collins: So you've got Denise, the sister who's a pain...
 * Parish: - And then there's a baby sister coming along.
 * Treadwell-Collins: It's a new phase for Denise and her family, which hopefully will be more positive. Frickative  22:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Names on this page
Time for a discussion rather than just editing and reverting. Should Bianca and Stacey be listed as their article names Bianca Jackson and Stacey Slater or by their "current" character names in the show, Bianca Butcher and Stacey Branning? Anemone Projectors  12:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * What we should be discussing is whether it's right to persistently remove sourced content and replace it with what AnemoneProjectors wants the characters to be referred to. Like I said on Talk:Tiffany Dean, I can sort of understand the stupid Wikipedia guidelines about article names (i.e. people searching for the character's most common name), but the content of atricles, titles aside, should be 100% accurate. I have made this article accurate and added sources for all the changes I have made. I fail to see the problem other than AP wanting to get his own way despite being in the wrong, and trying to delay by telling me to discuss good faith, well referenced and ACCURATE changes to the article. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Stop reverting, wait for consensus. Thanks. Or like I said, leave Wikipedia. Please. I beg of you. Anemone  Projectors  12:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I can't believe you. I really can't. Who decided that the article reflects article names not character names? I'm willing to bet that it was you. I'll edit Wikipedia as much as I like, it's got nothing to do with you and I find your behaviour rude and unneccessary when all I've done is try to make the article as accurate and well-referenced as possible. I'll be asking other administrators to review this situation as I think you have totally shown yourself up. It's not about what you want, it should be about accuracy. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * There has been a long-standing consensus on this page to use common names (i.e. article titles). It's been that way for a long time and several other editors have reverted these changes. It's never been discussed until now but the consensus is still there. Remember, there is no "now" in the fictional world. There is no "current" name, just a common one. Anemone  Projectors  12:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * When was this consensus decided and by whom? -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 13:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Like I said, it wasn't discussed. Consensus is formed through editing as well as discussion. Anemone  Projectors  13:17, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * My feeling is they should be listed as Jackson and Slater respectively - if they're the common names, then it also stands to reason that they're also the names the majority of casual readers will recognise/look for. (And I don't know what's with all the hostility, but this is the silliest page move I've seen since this one =/) Frickative  12:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not like readers won't know that Bianca Butcher and Stacey Branning are the same as Bianca Jackson and Stacey Slater, so I don't see the problem. I already explained that I get why the article titles use the common name, but I think that all content in the articles should be as accurate as possible (for example, Bianca's article starts with "Bianca Butcher, (née Branning, previously Jackson)", which is correct), so in my opinion, this list should reflect the characters' most recent name, which I have added and referenced but is apparently not good enough. I honestly don't get how AnemoneProjectors can argue with official BBC sources! -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Personally I agree with what Trampikey is saying, even though I don't agree with the way he went about it. Fact is, their names have changed - I don't see why the policy on this has too. Or maybe it hasn't, it's just now that it's being implemented, I don't know. When Denise remarried, it was immediately changed to Johnson, as before when Jane married, and Roxy, and Stacey (the first time). My opinion is we go by what name they are credited by, and change it as and when. Going by how many hits each name has on Google is just stupid, of course there's going to be more results for the most recent name! All this is what redirects were created for, using their previous name is actually quite misleading. Ooh, Fruity    Ooh, Chatty  13:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I do disagree with Denise's page being moved but I wasn't here to disagree at the time, so it stayed. We have only briefly discussed moving other pages back to common names such as Dot Cotton rather than Dot Branning but nothing was ever decided in those cases, only with some like Stacey. Google doesn't always have more results for the "current" name. Anemone  Projectors  13:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * And I'm not arguing with BBC sources (or any other sources) over Bianca's name currently being Butcher. I know that it is. But the article's title is still Jackson and to me it makes more sense to use the article title on this page. Anemone  Projectors  13:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Facts are the basis of Wikipedia, and currently the articles are not factually correct, because they are using the wrong names. All previous names redirect to the page anyway so I really don't see the point in all this. Ooh, Fruity    Ooh, Chatty  14:02, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * This isn't a discussion about moving articles, it's about what titles to use on THIS page. Bianca Jackson is not the wrong name, just like Bree Van de Kamp isn't the wrong name. We shouldn't treat EastEnders any differently just because it is a soap opera set in "real time". Anemone  Projectors  14:07, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd quite like to unprotect the page, so can we try to reach a conclusion soonish? Anemone  Projectors  14:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I stand by my first comment - I think WP:COMMONNAME should apply to the list as much as to article titles. If a name is the one the majority of readers are likely to recognize, it stands to reason that using a different name would be counter-productive and impede navigation. We should be taking the majority of all Wikipedia readers into account, not just the minority who are present-EastEnders fans. Frickative  15:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Casual readers are probably more likely to go by first name anyway, so I think the list should be as accurate and up to date as possible. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 15:53, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * But as I said, we shouldn't treat EastEnders differently to any other TV series just because it is a soap opera set in "real time", using Desperate Housewives as an example. In the most recent episodes, Bree is called Bree Hodge, but the list of characters has her as Bree Van de Kamp, matching the article's title. "Bianca Jackson" is still the name of the character, this doesn't make us wrong. Anemone  Projectors  16:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm going to revert the protection of this page to semi-protection to allow others to make edits. I'm going to leave the last names as they are, though it is not the version I or Frickative agree with. Though we haven't reached a conclusion yet, so I feel it should be reverted to how it was before the discussion started, but as I am involved, I don't think I should be the one to do this. Anemone  Projectors  20:37, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Why have you changed it back to how you like it after saying that then? 86.136.123.224 (talk) 22:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not how he likes it, it's just how it goes. -- GSorby Desroid  22:47, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Trust me, he gets his own way. He thinks he's supreme overlord and owner of all EastEnders related articles on Wikipedia. Gets right on my tits but I shan't be bothering anymore, I can't devote the time to argue with sad people like him who are so anal and illogical. 86.136.123.224 (talk) 22:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Log in, Trampikey. WP:COMMONNAME applies here, Frickative agrees with me. You don't even care about Wikipedia! Anemone  Projectors  23:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well maybe that's what you think Trampikey, but all Anemone is doing is trying to do the right thing, I'm not taking sides or nothing like that, but that's the truth. And Anemone, I think Trampikey does care about Wikipedia but doesn't like it when things gets reverted and removed because it's not correct. Don't you gree? -- GSorby Desroid  23:09, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * He only comes here to edit this article. He left in favour of another site. Anyway, like I said, WP:COMMONNAME should apply to this article, and Frickative agrees. The names on this list should be the same as the article titles. Anemone  Projectors  23:12, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Saying that, you're right. Looking at Trampikey's contributions, more than half of them are on the List of EastEnders characters, and I agree, WP:COMMONNAME should apply on this article. -- GSorby Desroid  23:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Sean Slater
People are adding Sean because there was a report that he would return at Christmas, but it was from an unreliable source, unrealitytv's blog, and hasn't been reported by any reliable sources. This was three days ago so I would at least expect Digital Spy to have reported it by now if it was confirmed. Anemone Projectors  11:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Glenda Mitchell
Should Glenda still be in the current cast? Her exit seems quite final, and this recent article in Digital Spy -

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2/eastenders/news/a261857/barber-never-played-glenda-as-a-baddy.html

The actress seems to indicate that she has finished filming? Bleaney (talk) 16:39, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * What part of that article indicates that she has finished filming? Anemone  Projectors  17:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

i would have thought eastenders would wanna keep glenda in becuase glynis barber who plays her is a fairly big star and with babs gone they need some reconisible faces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.45.227 (talk) 10:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * She's not gone  Anemone  Projectors  23:39, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I can see in the Spoilers that Glenda is returning! Bleaney (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Becca Swanson
Should Becca still be classed as a present character? She does not seem to be appearing in any upcoming episodes, and her exit seemed quite final? Bleaney (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but she implied she wasn't gone. I think we should wait for the end of this week because it's been hinted that one or two characters will return during the next two episodes, and Becca could be one of them. When they want to surprise us, they deliberately miss names off the credits for upcoming episodes on the BBC Programmes site (such as Sam Mitchell over the Christmas period, and Denise when we were meant to think she was dead). Becca's departure was never announced. Anemone  Projectors  13:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've now changed Becca to past. No idea who the two characters who were meant to return were! Anemone  Projectors  21:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Reverend Stevens
I appreciate that it's difficult to tell whether a recurring character will appear again in EE, we can never be 100% definate. However, with regard to Reverend Stevens - On 27th July, a different vicar (named Reverend Wallace) appeared in EE to talk to Heather about George's christening. Dot even remarked, Who are you?, implying that there has been a change of vicar in Walford. While i'm not advocating that we replace Stevens with Wallace (one appearance is not enough to be considered recurring) I think it might be appropriate to remove Reverend Stevens from the list and class him as a past character. Any thoughts? Bleaney (talk) 14:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed.  GunGagdin Moan 14:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. GSorby  Desroid  15:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What if there is more than one vicar in the area? Do they always use the same church? Just because a new vicar has appeared, it does not mean that Reverend Stevens will stop appearing. Dot asking "Who are you?" only implies that she hasn't met him before, not that Reverend Stevens has gone. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  15:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes! Of coruse! I never thought of that. I think we should keep him as reccuring until we're sure he's gone. -- GSorby Desroid  15:26, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No. I re-added Reverend Stevens to the list because he appears next week. I probably should have said so in my edit summary, so I apologise for that. Anemone  Projectors  16:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Cast of E20
are the new characters in Eastenders: E20 gonna join the main show? just wondering because zsa zsa, leon, fatboy and mercy did after the first series of e20 finished. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.37.218 (talk) 09:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Leon, Fatboy and Zsa Zsa also appeared before E20 started. There has been no confirmation that the new E20 characters will appear, though one or two people said they might. But they were just hoping. I hope Naz does. Anemone  Projectors  11:22, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Jim Branning
shouldn't he be moved to recurring as he hardly ever appears now and when he does its only for the odd episode?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.144.71 (talk) 12:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * We've had this discussion! Jim was always a regular character before John Bardon had a stroke, so we do not downgrade his status. Anemone  Projectors  13:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Glen
One of the extras is called Glen (or Glenn), it emerged yesterday, when Alfie spoke to him. However, he's not been credited. Should we add him to the named extras? Anemone Projectors  12:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Adding durations and Sean Slater's possible return
Why can't we add durations to the character list? All the other soap wiki pages have durations for the characters on the character list.

Also, it has been talked about that sean is returning? is this true or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.3.102 (talk) 23:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Re Sean, see the above section. As for durations, we felt just didn't need them in a list of characters, as all the information is in the articles.  Anemone  Projectors  00:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

k thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.3.102 (talk) 19:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Current cast/Recurring cast
Ae there any rules or conventions in place on this list for deciding who is in the current cast, and who is only recurring? I ask this because Greg Jessop is in the main cast list, though press coverage indicates he is a temporary character. Harry Gold on the other hand is classed as a recurring character, though there are indications that he may become a major new baddie in EE. Anyone got any ideas? Bleaney (talk) 23:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Someone brought this up on my user talk and I assumed they would move Harry to regular afterwards because he's appearing about as regularly as Grace at the moment. There are no rules or conventions. I think Harry, Grace and Greg should be treated as regulars, with recurring left for people like Mr Lister, Reverend Stevens and all the babies and children that don't appear regularly. Anemone  Projectors  00:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, what are these "indications that he may become a major new baddie"? Is this like your "The actress seems to indicate that she has finished filming" re: Glenda Mitchell? Anemone  Projectors  00:13, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * On Harry Gold's own wiki page, Bryan Kirkwood is credited as saying that the character will have similarities to Archie Mitchell. Hardly the kind of thing you say for a very temporary character is it? Is this calling out you getting precious again over this list Anemone? Or is it like Kim Fox, when you changed my edits about her being permanent as you dont read spoilers without any discussion? Bleaney (talk) 00:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Kris Green (then) from Digital Spy said that, not Bryan Kirkwood. Harry and Grace were never "announced" in the way Vanessa, Jodie, Michael, Greg, Julie and even short-term character Harvey were, so it leads me to believe they're not being considered full-time regular characters by the producers. They just pop up every now and then, but more regularly than recurring characters, which is why I think we should list them as regulars. Anemone  Projectors  01:08, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * However, the difference between Grace and Harry is that one lives on Albert Square and the other lives outside of London, so one is more likely to appear than the other. Harry and Grace are the kind of characters whose departures will never be announced, like Becca. Now that Vanessa has left Harry, he may never appear again, but we're not going to know about it. Anemone  Projectors  01:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Have added Harry Gold to the main cast list, for now it seems, he is featuring as much as others. Still unsure about Greg though, as we definately know he is a temporary character, and if he does go permanent, it will no doubt be announced. But am happy with the list at present. Bleaney (talk) 01:21, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Even though Greg is a guest, I think he will appear regularly as a guest. Plus he has a profile on the EastEnders website, which would be unusual for a recurring character. Harry and Grace don't have them (but then again neither does Mercy yet). Anemone  Projectors  01:42, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

If Harry Starts to appear more then he will be upgraded to regular —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.3.102 (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

i sometimes think that eastenders introduces characters like Harry just to fill the gap untill new regualr characters are introduced! remember a lot of charcters have left or been axed this year and they need characters to fill the gaps or the show would be become very bare. i see what you mean about Harry and Grace, another charcater whos departure was never anouced was Tod Taylor earlier on in the year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.144.144 (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

come to think of it Lucas's departure wasn't anouced either! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.144.144 (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Todd Taylor was similar to Becca, but Lucas was a proper regular, main character. They didn't announce his departure to keep the storyline a secret. Anemone  Projectors  12:37, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

going back to harry's status, i would class him as semi-regular. he appears to often to be classed as recurring but not enough to be a main regular. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.47.220 (talk) 19:54, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * We don't use semi-regular as a status. It's either regular, recurring or guest. If you consider him semi-regular, I would say regular is the best option. Anemone  Projectors  20:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

agreed :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.58.228 (talk) 08:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

To be fair AP, Digital Spy did announce Harry Gold's arrival just not as part of their news section. They did a piece in their Soap Scoop blog about his arrival here: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2/eastenders/scoop/a227164/first-look-harry-gold-joins-eastenders.html So it's not really like Grace who wasn't announced at all apart from a brief mention in an interview Bryan Kirkwood did with Digital Spy. There are so many rules that it's hard to know what is going on with these Wiki articles anymore. Many decisions about some of the lesser characters are just wild stabs in the dark in regards to their status. For example Connor appearing in the departing characters list (without a source stating such; yet we need a source to prove Harry was announced as a character seemingly). (PS. yes I do note that Harry has been added to the list. Just responding to an earlier comment)


 * I didn't say Harry awasn't announced, I said "Harry and Grace were never 'announced' in the way Vanessa, Jodie, Michael, Greg, Julie and even short-term character Harvey were". It was only DS that did it, whereas the others were on other news sites. Do you think Connor is staying? He's a guest character, of course they won't announced his departure! He'll be gone after the funeral. Anemone  Projectors  11:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I do think Connor will be around after the funeral, yes. However I don't expect you to pay attention to anything I've got to say. But when he is you can admit you were too quick to list him as departing and admit that you probably should have heeded my advice and waited. All this is really just your intuition. At least Trampikey and Gungadin are open to other points of view.

PS. Shouldn't Bianca be listed as Bianca Butcher in this list? :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.241.237 (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Love how a source is usually the most important thing, except for when you believe something.

Sorry I missed the earlier discussion about character names. Really can't believe the way you have spoken to Trampikey 'begging' him to leave Wikipedia. He was here before you were and has put a lot of valued hard work into these articles. On the name debate I'm with the view they should be changed to reflect the character's current names. Arguably Stacey Branning and Bianca Butcher to use these two examples are as much known by their married name as they are by their maiden names. Bianca was previously a Butcher on the show before while Stacey has been a Branning since 2007. Yes people will always refer to them as Jackson and Slater but it's not like their married names are never used in the wider consensus. It's like the article refers to Pat as Pat Evans because that's her name and has been for a long time yet you would probably get a lot of people who still think of her as Pat Butcher. You could say Bianca has been a Butcher consistently since 1997 actually since people don't usually revert to their maiden name following a split. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.241.237 (talk) 12:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, let's remove Connor from departing, as we don't know that he is. He may find a reason to stick around, and could be a new Becca. Discussion about names is above, not in this section. Go there. Besides, we've already decided. Anemone  Projectors  13:56, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No YOU decided. And I did say I missed the earlier discussion. Not everyone spends most of their life on here so knows everything that has gone on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.62.26 (talk) 17:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It was decided by a number of people, based on existing Wikipedia policies. Anemone  Projectors  18:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Well I can see you had plenty of say in it as usual but then you appear to decide everything around here. I am not the only one who feels this way. In fact you have turned regular contributors away from editing these articles with YOUR policies. I love how you quote the policies at me yet you bend them willy-nilly to support your own view point. That is my final word on the matter. Reply if you want to but I won't be coming back to read it. Some of us do have a life sweetie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.62.26 (talk) 19:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh seriously you need to cut out the lip a bit, AnemoneProjectors' job is to determine the best solutions and it's not what HE decided it's what the fact actually is. I think you should be more formal and polite in my opinion, if you don't like the policies, don't bother coming here. -- GSorby Desroid  - (Contribs!) 19:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

And who rattled your cage. It's not a job I think you'll find. A job is something someone does for a living and is paid for doing. Editing Wikipedia is nothing more than a hobby to most people including the elected volunteer Administrators yes. I have been editing Wikipedia since September 2005, making contributions to EastEnders articles. I do have an account. I stopped using it and making regular contributions a couple of years ago as I didn't like some of the changes that were being made, and it's been downhill from there. Oh for the days when Trampikey, Gungadin and the fabulous EastEnders the great were the ones calling the shots on these articles - at least they listened to people. I actually came here today to offer help and advise AP that Connor being listed as a departing character was premature but some people can't be helped and have to get all arsey about it. I've said before on these pages (think it was the theme tune one) there is no greater source than watching the show itself. But the whole source argument is redundant anyway since AP is happy enough to make changes WITHOUT one when it suits him. While rigidly asking everyone else for sources, for things they've watched with their own eyes and KNOW, and have tried to be helpful in adding. I will be coming back here in a few weeks time after Billie's funeral when Connor is still in the show and I hope to find an admission from AP that perhaps adding characters to sections of this list should be done when their status has been verified in the show or by a proper source, moving characters to different sections under any other circumstances is a premature exercise. AP has done this before, and am surprised hasn't learnt the lesson after wrongly listing Ben Mitchell as a departed character when he was still in upcoming episodes back in the summer! I used to think that JPS bloke was Hitler reincarnated but not anymore... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.62.26 (talk) 22:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I have already removed Connor from the list. So let's just leave it at that and end the discussion. This was supposed to be about listing Harry as regular or recurring. Anemone  Projectors  23:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Aunt Sal
Can we add her back to recurring characters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.108.72 (talk) 15:42, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Why, is she coming back? Anemone  Projectors  16:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

She is back for Ronnie's wedding - annoyed that she didn't receive an invite - 11th November. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.108.72 (talk) 16:08, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will sort it out :-) Anemone  Projectors  17:06, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Ina Clare
Ina has died :( Just seen it on Devon Anderson's twitter, and it's been covered by ATV - how do we deal with it? Move straight to past? We don't know when her last episode will air, or if it has already. Ooh, Fruity    Ooh, Chatty  00:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * RIP Ina :( I would say move straight to past but also include that reference in case anyone reverts it. --5 albert square (talk) 01:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * RIP Ina. I saw it on Rob Kazinsky's twitter last night :( As an extra it's impossible to tell, but I would say we should wait until we're absolutely sure. They will have to make some kind of reference to the character, so if she doesn't appear again we can wait for that reference. Remember when Ron Tarr died? They said his character had won the lottery and moved to Spain. Anemone  Projectors  09:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, Ina Foot redirects to the list of named extras. What do we do after we take her off? Anemone Projectors  19:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, this link reveals she spent 24 years on the show, indicating she joined in 1986. Although we don't know the date of her first appearance, surely we've got enough information on her to add her to the '86 list?  Ooh, Fruity    Ooh, Chatty  20:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. According to IMDb she was only credited twice :( but yes, I think she should have a list entry in the 1986 list. Anemone  Projectors  20:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Kylie
Are we sure that Kylie's returning? I know the Press Office said that the character is played by Elarica Gallagher in the reference, but she does not appear on the credits on the BBC site or tvtv.co.uk. 144.124.121.55 (talk) 19:13, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * If she's not in the BBC credits, she's not returning. I also asked Elarica Gallacher (on Twitter) about 5 minutes after I saw her name on the Press Office site and she said she's not returning. Anemone  Projectors  19:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I've watched the episodes and can confirm she's definitely not returning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.224.30 (talk) 16:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * We already established that. Anemone  Projectors  17:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Was only giving the best confirmation possible. Calm down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.224.30 (talk) 19:56, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah but we already established it. The episode's credits are a reliable source. Anemone  Projectors  20:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Not disputing the credits but in my view the most reliable source are the episodes themselves. Anyway Kylie is no longer on the list of characters about to appear so let's leave it at that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.224.30 (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That's because I reverted myself as soon as this was established and the discussion was resolved. Episodes shouldn't be used to verify facts if the episodes haven't yet been broadcast. Anemone  Projectors  22:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Who's Carl??
reading digital spy about upcoming eipisodes it says "Carl tells Connor" and i think Connor may go regular because he gonna be appearing a lot in the next few weeks according to Digital Spy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.160.241 (talk) 19:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Clearly a typing error, meant to be Carol. If Connor becomes regular, we'll change him when the time comes. But for now we're waiting, he's still only recurring. Anemone  Projectors  20:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Jean Slater
She's returning - this is a fact, and should be included in Wikipedia's list of returning characters. Otherwise, Wikipedia is inaccurately saying that she is only leaving and not coming back. I simply don't understand any reason for not including her return - there is no confusion since the reference is provided. The information should be here. Stephenb (Talk) 08:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * This is the same situation as Bianca. It's silly saying someone is returning when they haven't even left. With Bianca we suggested some kind of note to say it's temporary, but this never happened as we were unsure what to do. This would be a better solution than saying Jean is both departing and returning. Returning means they've left and are coming back, not will come back after they leave. They have to leave first. Anemone  Projectors  12:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But she is both departing and (then) returning. The problem is that she'd no longer really departing permanently, which is what the current article effectively states. A note would certainly be a good idea, yes. Ignoring it in the article is not a good idea. Stephenb (Talk) 15:45, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I already added the note yesterday. Anemone  Projectors  16:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * D'oh! So you did, I didn't notice, sorry..! Stephenb (Talk) 18:42, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That's ok :-) Anemone  Projectors  18:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Maude the extra
Why is Maude still on this list in the extras section? I appreciate there has never been any official announcement of her departure, but there is never likely to be, and as her own article says, her last appearance was several years ago. We are a lot more ruthless when it comes to including/discluding recurring characters on this list, and she could always be added again if she reappears. But to have her on here now just seems odd Bleaney (talk) 13:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I dunno, I don't even know who she is. If you know when she last appeared, move her to that section of the past list. Anemone  Projectors  13:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I havent got a clue either. I have no idea when her last appearance was, i'm only going on what her article entry says. Does she need a 'last' date to be put in the past list? Or will she stay here by default because we dont know it? Seems strange to keep her here, I know all the other extras listed but not her. Bleaney (talk) 14:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, IMDb last credits her in 2004, so I guess put her in the 2004 section of the past list. Anemone  Projectors  19:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Bleaney (talk) 22:20, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

notes section for ALL of the cast changes area
think we should put a notes section for all of them? ie. the returning, departing and future characters. Example: Sonia is returning for 1 episode only, we would put "1 episode only" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.14.237 (talk) 15:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * None of the others would require a note though. Anemone  Projectors  16:21, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I dont see why a note would be needed, even for Sonia Bleaney (talk) 00:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Jane Beale
I know we keep removing Jane because the reference doesn't state she'll be taking time off, but isn't it common sense? She's not going to carry on filming with no maternity leave, is she? Anemone Projectors  17:32, 10 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree, she needs to be in the departing list, subject to all of the current duration discussions! Bleaney (talk) 13:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Michael Moon
Why is he still in the present cast list, he hasn't been seen September and as far as I know there hasn't been a date when he returns, so he should either be in past or returning characters list surely.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.81.148.105 (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * He's back very very very very soon. (Monday 31 January)  Anemone  Projectors  15:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * And it looks like it might be a long-term thing from there on. I think we were ok to keep him as present rather than returning. It's only 10 days now so might as well just leave him where he is! Anemone  Projectors  15:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Ina no longer in episodes?
Doesn't Ina need to be removed from the extras list now as she sadly passed away? She died a few months ago now so she won't be in any more episodes will she? Sam10123 (talk) 20:48, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We've been waiting for a confirmation that she will no longer appear in episodes. She did appear in episodes after her death (she was filming up to a few days before she died), so we were right to revert her removal. We do not know if she is in further episodes, but we are expecting some kind of mention of the character as to why she is no longer appearing, as when Ron Tarr died. Anemone  Projectors  21:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Maybe Ina should be in departing characters list? Just a suggestion


 * There probably won't be a confirmation that she's left (not one that can be cited on here anyway) and I'm not sure they will even reference her leaving on screen. Julie is running the flower stall from now on. Ina hasn't appeared yet in 2011. 144.124.121.55 (talk) 21:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Not that I've seen in episodes. If Julie is taking over in future episodes, I would expect Ina to be mentioned. But I would assume she is now no longer appearing. Any idea what her last appearance was? I know it was in the Vic. – Anemone Projectors – 21:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)


 * We've already seen Julie taking over the flower stall but she only mentioned that it was because Jean was in "the bin". Though Julie's new promos are her by the flower stall. Ina's last appearance was 23 December 2010. 144.124.121.55 (talk) 02:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * She might have taken over Jean's job but not Ina's, i.e. ownership. But let's move Ina to past now. – Anemone Projectors – 09:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Walford web
content is being removed from all EE articles because it is sourced to walford web, and this seems to be due to an issue stemming from sourcing on this list. Can we discuss here before any more removal please? What is the issue with Walford web's reliability? It is a fan site, but far as I am aware they are actually affiliated with the BBC/Eastenders on that site now, and if so cant they be deemed reliable? To the user removing the content, are you connected to walford web? and if so, can you shed more light on this please?  GunGagdin Moan 19:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I could've sworn Trampikey was the owner of Walford Web... -- GSorby  Chat with Me! 20:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, he's not. That site's been going years, Trampikey's too young to have started that. Unless he's taken over management.  GunGagdin Moan 20:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * As Gungadin rightly said, I'm too young to have started Walford Web ;). However, I have been a member of their forums for over five years there and edit their character Wiki. I don't think it's right to say that Walford Web is unreliable as they are affiliated with the BBC and EE Press Office. They got the exclusive on Ashley Chubb (which Digital Spy copied almost word for word when they reported it), and have had many interviews with EastEnders producers and cast members, like the Walford Gazette, which is used as a source on here as well. Though I do think there needs to be some consistency, so if Frickative says that Walford Web fails to comply with WP:SPS as a source for this list, then it should not be used as a source for other WP:WPEE articles. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 20:19, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice to see you again Trampikey :-)  GSorby  Chat with Me! 20:29, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:SPS does allow for exceptions, when something is "produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." Can a case be made for Walford Web on these grounds? FWIW, I think exceptions can also be made in the case of exclusive interviews, which are not likely to be reproduced in full by other sources. For news articles, though, "if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so." (Sorry, not trying to be obtuse by just quoting policy, will try and expand a bit when Holby City is over :p) Frickative  20:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, back with a bit more. The original article in question, as far as I can see, doesn't appear to be attributed to a particular author (though I could easily be missing it). That makes it hard to make a case for whoever wrote it being an "established expert" on EastEnders. Beyond that, I've had a quick scout around the info pages, where it states that Walford Web has "absolutely no connections to the BBC in any way, shape or form". Then there's this page which states that the site owner takes submissions from anyone who wants to write for it, and has never rejected one yet, which potentially raises questions about the extent of editorial oversight in play. I'd still personally be inclined to make an exception for including useful/valuable content from directly conducted interviews on Wikipedia, but beyond that, as SPS advices, source news and editorial items elsewhere if at all possible. Might be worth starting a thread at the reliable sources noticeboard if anyone has strong feelings otherwise. (And if the website has become affiliated with the Beeb, suggest the site owner update the disclaimer to reflect that? :)) Frickative  23:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Frickative,

The page you refer to about 'user submissions' is not referring to news items and is instead referring to personal articles based on episodes of EastEnders which have already aired. I do accept that this could be a lot clearer though. No other user submitted content is accepted by Walford Web other than these articles, one such example of a user submission can be found here: http://www.walfordweb.co.uk/item.php?id=2779

The statement about having no connection to the BBC is I think referring to the fact that the BBC has no responsibility over WW, however I was not the one who wrote that disclaimer so could not explain it further.

While I do not own Walford Web, I do help out with the site and have been doing so for a couple of years now and I can confirm that WW does have regular contact with the EastEnders Press Office. They provide spoilers/interviews for the site as well as further information or confirmation of news stories. If it helps the story of Fat Boy's father joining came from an EastEnders Press Officer and we had this online before Digital Spy. It would be a shame were valid news items on WW dismissed in favour of DS articles all the time, especially when these, like the stuff you see on DS, have had input from the BBC. However, a policy is a policy and you have to do what you've got to do. I just wanted to give clarification on a couple of things. :) WWEllie (talk) 07:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clarifying, Ellie! Are the news articles all written by the same person/team, then? In that case—it might be a bit of a stretch, and I'm not sure how it would fly at the RS noticeboard—but a quick GNews search turns up a couple of articles which demonstrate WW's work being published by a reliable third-party publication, which certainly strengthens the argument for accepting it. (I do sympathise with DS ripping others off all the time - their unique content is great, but it's frustrating how much is cribbed from elsewhere). Perhaps if a small additional disclaimer could be added somewhere mentioning that, while the Beeb isn't responsible for the site's content, Walford Web does have contact with the EE Press Office for news articles/interviews, then a stronger case for its use could be made under policy. Frickative  14:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Lucy Beale
I'm removing Lucy from the returning characters list as according to Inside Soap, there are no plans for Lucy OR Peter to return at present. 144.124.121.55 (talk) 17:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * See Talk:Lucy Beale. All it says is they haven't recast her yet. – Anemone Projectors – 20:34, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Harry (and Grace)
We've never dicussed Harry - he's still listed as present, but do we think he's coming back at all? Does anyone know? Should we move him to past? Also, I feel we were wrong to treat Grace as a regular character and I think we should move her back to recurring (same as Harry if he's still appearing). What does everyone think? – Anemone Projectors – 20:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, they're not really regular do it's best to move them to reccuring -- GSorby  Chat with Me! 20:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * (ec)Arguably, Grace and Mercy and Fatboy are recurring I suppose. Presumably that will change as for some unexplainable reason, Fatboy is winning awards!! He's the worst bit of trash character ive seen in ages.... But anyway, if they have a fixed contract, then they should be counted as regulars. Recurrings like Sal dont have fixed contracts do they. Take for instance Josie McFarlane. She was in about 2 episodes, but she had a fixed contract for all that time!! They just never used her... dunno about Harry, i tend not to read spoilers about minor characters like this, so I have no idea if he's to appear again. He's definitely not present or regular that's for sure.  GunGagdin Moan 20:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Mercy and Fatboy are 100% on fixed contracts and are 100% main characters, but not sure about Grace (Fatboy's dad is being cast so they can give Fatboy more screen time, and presumably Mercy at the same time). But mostly I want to know if we should put Harry as past. I know we're waiting a while on Connor and Jordan for Carol and Denise's storylines to pick up, but Jodie and Vanessa are on screen all the time and there's no Harry. – Anemone Projectors – 20:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

i don't think Harry will appear again and i'm having doubts about Grace, scenes that i thought would feature Grace (such as the Christmas scenes in the community centre) never did and i'm beginning to think she along with Harry were only temporary to fill the gaps as a lot of main characters left. i would move them to rcurring as we're not 100% sure they're gone. they are definately not regulars though! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.182.227 (talk) 09:10, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I think Grace will still appear when Fatboy and Mercy's storylines pick up, but I reckon Ellen Thomas (Grace's actress) has been busy lately, because she's been in quite a lot of things recently! – Anemone Projectors – 09:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

i think as soon as fatboy's dad turns up her storylines will pick up (probabaly get married) and for harry as soon as jodie and darren wedding story starts picking up there will be a lot more talk about who is going to walk her down the isle so they will probabaly bring back harry for that.--MayhemMario (talk) 13:51, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Mercy and Grace are both classed as recurring characters, it's just that Mercy has been used more as Ellen Thomas has been filming Coming of Age and Come Fly With Me. Harry has left (as have Jordan and Connor). 144.124.121.55 (talk) 18:51, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Mercy's not a recurring character. How do you know Harry won't be back? – Anemone Projectors – 20:28, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

i agree wiith anemoneprojectors how do you know that harry,jordan and connor ahve left, it is not in the news and with arzene kene's nomination i htink that connor will be back as well as jordan as his aunt cant keep wanting him.--MayhemMario (talk) 20:43, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sure if you contacted the EastEnders press office they would be happy to confirm that Connor, Jordan and Harry have left, and that they class Mercy as a recurring character. :) 144.124.121.55 (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * How about something we can actually reference on Wikipedia? Anyway, there are other discussions about Connor and Jordan. This is just about Harry, and to a lesser extent, Grace. – Anemone Projectors – 22:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * My feeling is that Harry will re-appear at some point, maybe to cause havoc at Jodie's wedding? Seeing as the last we saw of him he kidnapped Jack Branning on his wedding day, it would imply its not over. However I agree that he should be moved to recurring. As for Grace? Who knows, definately recurring, but she does live on the square, and there's been no mention from Mercy that she has left. Bleaney (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, Bleaney! I think we were wrong to put Grace and Harry as regulars in the first place. – Anemone Projectors – 13:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)