Talk:List of Neighbours characters/Archive 1

Layout
A while ago I changed many pictures to suit the layout better, but they still included all of the characters on the show on the page, but it all got reverted WITHOUT any reason or discussion of it. I feel that this layout suits the page better because previously there were all of these blank spaces on the page where as this layout prevents it from occuring. If there is any objection, please discuss first before changing anything back. Swanny92 05:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NBlairCarmella.jpg
Image:NBlairCarmella.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:PippaBlackElle.jpg
Image:PippaBlackElle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NWhelanPepper.jpg
Image:NWhelanPepper.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SamClark.jpg
Image:SamClark.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RachelKinskiNeighbours.jpg
Image:RachelKinskiNeighbours.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DHoflinOliver.jpg
Image:DHoflinOliver.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AaronAW.jpg
Image:AaronAW.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ETCJanae.jpg
Image:ETCJanae.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CBonnerSteph.jpg
Image:CBonnerSteph.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AFletcherKarl.jpg
Image:AFletcherKarl.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MWerkmeisterZeke.jpg
Image:MWerkmeisterZeke.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SDennisPaul.jpg
Image:SDennisPaul.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RKinski.jpg
Image:RKinski.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NSaleebaRosetta.jpg
Image:NSaleebaRosetta.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 16:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:BTuckerDaniel.jpg
The image Image:BTuckerDaniel.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:


 * Image:Bridget Parker.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --13:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Durations of actors
I stated in my edit summary that I added James Sorensen's departure in as the character/actor table is clearly set out to relate to the actor's durations. This is noted by Blake O'Leary, Jacob Brito, Jordan Smith and Jordy Lucas's durations all relating to the actor, not the character. I used the exact same formatting (with the footnote and hidden note included like every other recasted character in the table). Please do not revert my edits if your reasons do not make any sense... thank you. Also, Sam Clark has not officially left the show, he is still in the credits and the opening titles, he is merely on a break. Swanny92 (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The difference between Declan being recast and the others is Declan does not leave the show for a period of time before being recast, he simply goes upstairs as James and comes back down as Erin. He does not need '2010' as his last appearance date as he still stays on the show. It won't matter soon anyway, since I'm planning to change the table layout and get rid of the duration dates. They've caused enough problems and the durations dates are included in the character's article. I'm going to make the table similar to List of EastEnders characters. Sam Clark still took a break from the show for three months, so he should remain in the returns section as he will return to screens in April or May. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  12:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Why does the fact that the recast will happen instantly matter? James Sorensen is still leaving, and will not be onscreen beyond 2010. You still fail to note the fact that every other recasted character on the list is following the same standard. Why not include Marisa Siketa's stint in Jordy Lucas's duration on the show? You can't because it makes no sense, just like it makes no sense to not have 2010 as James Sorensen's final year on the show. Read this quote from the WP:SOAPS article: Character articles should always be written from a "real world" perspective, and should definitely not consist simply of in-universe plot summary. As such, it should include:Which actors have played the character, and when. Note "which actors have played the character, and when.". Now explain to me why you don't want James Sorensen's end year to be included? Swanny92 (talk) 03:06, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * To be honest, that is the way the table has always been to me. I don't know who made the decision to add the hidden notes, but I followed the same pattern. Declan's recast is different, so I thought that he should retain his place in the table as he does not leave the show and then come back like the others. Apologies if that's wrong. I had a look at the EastEnders list and they have previous actors instead of duration dates, which is what I'm going to change the Neighbours one to. The note on the EastEnders talk page says "Dates do not need to be provided in the list, individual dates and information is available in the articles for individual characters!". Which I now agree with, do you think Declan should stay in the same place in the table or moved? - JuneGloom07    Talk?  12:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Declan's recast isn't all that different, in the end he's still a recasted character, he'll still be played by a different actor, so I don't get that point there. I don't mind if you want to remove the durations all together, but I think if that's the way every soap character list article is going then it should be set as a standard on the WP:SOAPS page so that all other soap articles can follow suit, as I checked and it doesn't even mention the format for character lists. Only reason why I found this treatment of Declan's recast unusual is that from when I used to be a regular Neighbours wiki article editor a while back, the character lists were always treated as being from the actor's perspective, not the character's. This would mean that any recasted characters mentioned in the current character list would only mention the durations for that [b]actor[/b] not the [b]character[/b]. And as I said, James's duration will then technically be 2007-2010, as James is not on the show from 2010 onwards, and Erin Mullally's would be 2010-present, as Erin was not on the show before 2010. I understand this is nearly irrelevant if the durations will be removed altogether, though in the mean time it would be nice to see some consistency. A recast is a recast. The time between recasts is irrelevant, it's still a recast. As far as I know, the character lists are still from the actor's perspective, seeing as Andrew's previous actor and Summer's previous actor's durations aren't mentioned, then Declan should be no different. It's all about consistency, yeah? Swanny92 (talk) 00:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I understand what you're saying now. Like I said, I was just following the same pattern as the others that were already there, like Ben and Charlie. I thought that Declan's recast was different as he doesn't leave the show, but thank you for bringing it up. :) - JuneGloom07    Talk?  01:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Haha cool. If you look Ben's duration doesn't include 2001-2003, 2004, as is in his article, and Charlie's is 2008- instead of 2006- :). So yeah, glad we're on the same level now then :P. Swanny92 (talk) 01:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't This Article Be Merged With The Main Neighbours Article?
I think it would be easier if this article was with the actual Neighbours article on Wikipedia. It's a bit silly having a whole new article for the characters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.181.205 (talk) 07:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it wouldn't. Most other soaps have seperate articles for cast changes. Home and Away doesn't, but that's because the whole article is a mess. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  10:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Duration dates
Why are they not present? Isn't it pretty much standard to have them? RAIN..the..ONE  HOTLINE 18:45, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you'll find that most of the cast lists are different, so there isn't a standard as such. However, the dates here (and in the EE list) were removed because the durations are included in the character's articles. It's pointless having them twice. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  18:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I just viewed the list as a seperate entity that was all. Was it because the actor duration confusion, meaning such as declan would have moved down the list if it went in order of duration. Have we discussed this before? Lol RAIN..the..ONE  HOTLINE 20:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It has been discussed a few times, lol. Those blooming dates were causing more fuss than was necessary, so it was better to remove them. Plus, like I said above, the durations are included in the articles. I know some lists have both the dates and the previous actors, but I've also seen the problems that causes. Being the main contributor to this article, I want things to be easy. I don't want to have to update/change/revert dates every time (I am totally thinking about myself here, lol). I'll have to ask Anemone if EE ever had dates and why they decided to remove them. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  22:01, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No we never used the durations in the EE page. We always revert their addition. It was basically User:Trampikey who didn't want them, but I don't see the need for them either, especially when some characters have been and gone several times, it causes clutter. Anemone  Projectors  23:02, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * So do we even need them for recurring characters on this page? After a little continuity.. Sorry I'm really nitpicking now. :p RAIN..the..ONE  HOTLINE 23:21, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * There was a reason for keeping the recurring characters' dates, but it doesn't really hold up anymore. Most of the characters in the list didn't have links/articles when the list was created, so the dates were kept to keep them in order (otherwise characters ended up all over the place). They can go now though, since the majority of the list has links. I'm hoping to get the 2008 list up really soon. Anemone, can I steal that note from the EE list's talk page? - JuneGloom07    Talk?  09:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks much better now. =)  RAIN..the..ONE  HOTLINE 20:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Brett Tucker...
...is returning as Dan in episode 6011. However, he filmed his scenes before he left in 2009. So, do we add him to the returning characters table or not? - JuneGloom07    Talk?  15:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd go for adding him. RAIN..the..ONE  HOTLINE 20:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, okay. Thought I'd just a second opinion. :) Oh, check this out. It's not finished yet, but I only have five characters left and three of them already have articles (which will need to be redirected). - JuneGloom07    Talk?  20:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Who Wrote That Stefan Dennis (Paul Robinson) Is Leaving?
I don't know who wrote this but in the article it says in the departing characters section that Stefan Dennis (Paul Robinson) is leaving. He is not leaving so whoever put that there should get a life. Nobody thinks you're smart or funny if you put characters are leaving when they aren't. It's stupid and immature. Grow up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.181.205 (talk) 07:08, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Someone decided to add a couple of unconstructive edits to the departing characters table and ended up putting Paul Robinson instead of Harry Ramsay. Btw, you shouldn't have removed the whole table from the article. A quick look in the history and you would have seen what had happened and you could have helped restore the section. Also, please sign your posts with ~ . Thank you. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  10:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Chris Pappas
Should he now be a listed as a Main Character? The sexuality storyline doesn't really make him a recurring character anymore! Ciao! db1987db (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC).


 * No, Chris is still an on-going recurring character. Just because he is getting more air time doesn't mean he's become a regular character. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  23:08, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah we go by what they are billed as, he's still recurring. If that were the case though Lou would be a mere recurring character now and so on and so on... RAIN..the..ONE  HOTLINE 23:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Lou is still a regular character. His contract is the same one that Ian Smith's was on towards the end. I think he's called a part-time regular as opposed to recurring. Now my real problam is whether Diana has gone for good, if so, her entrance was better than her exit. - JuneGloom07    Talk?  23:59, 29 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm from the UK so several months behind you guys. So I didn't know whether the character had had more significant storylines since! Ta for the answers! Ciao db1987db (talk) 08:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

List of Neighbours characters
Would anyone object to this being moved to List of Neighbours characters? There are a few reasons really. 1) This is a list and the title should say so. 2) This is a list of characters rather than cast. 3) It would match other soaps, especially List of EastEnders characters, and List of Neighbours characters currently redirects to the list of past Neighbours characters, but if I wanted to see what was currently in Neighbours, I'd most likely type "List of Neighbours characters" into the search box. Anemone  Projectors  19:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that was the title (or something similar) before it got moved to Current cast of Neighbours. I think it was HJ who said that it's a list of current characters and should be moved to that title. I have no objections to it being moved, but can AWB be used to fix all the links in the character pages and the template, etc? - JuneGloom    Talk  19:31, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes it was HJ. I moved the page to List of characters from Neighbours and he moved it to Current cast of Neighbours in December 2009. - JuneGloom    Talk  19:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Aproves* - I think it's a good idea too. RAIN*the*ONE  BAM 20:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I can use AWB to do that. I'll sort it all out sometime this afternoon (as long as the page or this one appears on my watchlist to remind me!!!) Anemone  Projectors  03:30, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Chris
Just putting this here now, so I don't have to write long edit summaries explaning why Chris has not been moved from the recurring table. As of 18 April, Chris has been added to the opening credits, however, he remains a recurring character. He will be a recurring character until early May. Recurring characters have been added to the opening credits before (Sienna and Nicola), therefore we should continue to look at the closing credits, which are always updated first. - JuneGloom    Talk  10:21, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Libby Kennedy/Kym Valentine
Hey everyone/anyone.

Kym Valentine recently took leave from Neighbours due to health reason. It has come to the attention of many Neighbour's editors, on weather or not she should be removed from the cast list or not. TV sites online have stated that she has left indefinitely.


 * 1) REDIRECT
 * 2) REDIRECT
 * 3) REDIRECT
 * 4) REDIRECT

These sites all state she is leaving indefinitely. And it was also confirmed in tonights episode 26/5/2011 episode 6169. Some users would rather her removal be made now, others insist its only temporary. So if we could come to an ultimate decision on this, that would be great guys. B.Davis2003 (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Well it says "indefinite" - which if you look in a dictionary says "Not clearly expressed or defined; vague: 'their status remains indefinite'".. - If it had said definite then we would remove her. But as she has the intention of returning and is on sick leave. That means that she is still part of the cast in some capacity. The Neighbours articles are good for sticking to the real wsorld view, not inside the Neighbours universe. Hope that makes sense. Rain the 1  BAM 12:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you keep adding REDIRECT, to link to an outside website just put the url in two brackets - []. Kym has left because she is ill, not because she has ended her contract. This is a temporary departure and she is coming back (unless otherwise stated). Imagine if she took maternity leave instead or she was on Tom Oliver's contract, we wouldn't remove her from the current list and send her to past. She is still contracted with the show and is still part of the cast. This is the same as the other time she took because she was ill, we didn't move her to past then and we shouldn't move her now. - JuneGloom    Talk  12:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks Rain, Gloom, I didnt know how to link other sites outside of wiki, until now, so thanks you! :) B.Davis2003 (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Dates
Ok, so I've decided to add dates anyway because the page is supposed to be a rundown of the characters of Neighbours. Using the logic above, there shouldn't be a present cast list at all. People may just want to look at the duration of their favourite characters without sifting through their individual pages. I personally think it's fitting and I'm sure others do too. Home & Away has a duration column and if anything, Neighbours should be consistent with this. Please don't delete it on the basis of the above note because I don't really think that's a valid excuse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbmaniac (talk • contribs) 03:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)


 * This article is a list of Neighbours characters, not a place to add a rundown of their info. All of the duration dates are provided in the articles and are not necessary on this page. The characters are ordered in order of entrance. I highly doubt you're going to be around everyday to clear up the mess, when people start playing around with them (which does happen frequently).

Saying people can't be bothered to go to the individual articles also seems to be an argument to avoid. I don't think you can speak for all the people who visit the page and one click is hardly a big effort on their part. Per WP:OTHERSTUFF, H&A has nothing to do with this article, this is the one we are discussing (other wise I could just say look at List of EastEnders characters and that's that). - JuneGloom    Talk  12:58, 2 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Bbmaniac - Who are you to decide what people in general want? More so I'd suggest you familiarise yourself with consensus, which we gained to have no duration dates in this list. Like Junegloom quite rightly pointed out, H&A lists have nothing to do with this Neighbours list. Besides this is a list for characters, not durations - as that is extra info that can be found by visiting the main articles. Rain the One  BAM 14:14, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

What, has there been a vote? How do YOU know what people want? As far as I know, having duration dates do not clutter the page nor do they cause any harm to anyone. A casual user may like the duration dates there. I'm using Home & Away as an example as it and Neighbours are the two prominent soap operas in Australia. People who visit this site may not be Neighbours' fans, but soap fans and what they see on one page, they may want to see on the other. There is no formal consensus, so don't pretend there is one. Also, many characters on this show are known for their duration. People don't really know who 'Callum Baker' is, but everyone knows who 'Paul Robinson' is, based on his prominence and duration on the show. It's an integral part of any character and is therefore an integral part of this page. JuneGloom, you seem to troll this page like you own it. Just remember, Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and as what I'm posting is not an act of vandalism, I'll continue to do so. Bbmaniac (talk) 08:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You are just making many assumtions.. your style of editing is not encouraged. Why? POV.. You have just offered us a lot of comparisons of what the fans may or may not want. Even said one character is more known than another (Maybe true) but where is your source? You are not offering us anything solid here. 'Don't try ad say there is concensus?' - Well you may not like it, but we did decide. Maybe it is only fair that we take another look at the decision as if enough people want change then it can happen. But at present it just seems to be you charging in with your idea, and not cosidering others view. Keep changing it - Though edit warring is disruptive behaviour.. Rain the One  BAM 11:58, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, so I've reverted it back, so sorry for being a nuisance, I didn't realise how many people were so protective over this page. My apologies. I guess I'll leave it to the experts to edit Neighbours' pages and I'll just read whatever you guys write. As an avid fan of Neighbours, I always came to this site wondering 'why doesn't the page include duration summaries yet other similar cast pages do (re H&A, Hollyoaks)? I didn't actually realise there were people that actually wanted it that way. Then again, I come from Adelaide, so I should be used to coming into contact with people with backward ideas. Bbmaniac (talk) 13:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You are welcome to edit constructively. However, I've reported you for doing to opposite. You know you can not edit war, when you realised you did you said sorry.. which is not valid if you follow it with another sarcastic comment. We are not the experts, this is an open project so please do not suggest otherwise. Rain the One  BAM 13:17, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

You do realise that I have tried to edit constructively. I don't see how adding duration is DECONSTRUCTIVE. Clearly, people don't want it (well, the people who can be bothered to reply back; probably the meak minority) and I now have to live with that, but as far as I'm concerned, this is nothing more, and will be nothing more than a summary page of characters. Kym Valentine & Jackie Woodburne are regularly featured in articles commenting on their longevity in the program, as is Ryan Moloney. Couch Time interviewed Scott Major and discussed in depth of his thoughts of being in the program for 2008. For many people, Neighbours' actors are known for their longevity in the program, it's really the only way they get famous these days. Longevity is such an integral part of a characters definition, not just for Neighbours but for Home & Away and other soaps. That is why I see Home & Away and other soaps embracing the duration on pages like this one and get a bit confused when Neighbours, of all soapies, doesn't do the same. But you guy's can do what you want. All sarcastic comments aside, I am sorry, I've obviously upset you guys which was never my intentions, but there is no logical reason currently running through my head why you wouldn't let this happen. If people started adding birth dates of characters, middle names of characters, residential addresses of characters, then I'd understand, but for the reasons above, I believe duration is different. Also, if duration isn't allowed, why is there a 'previous actor' column in there? It's hardly necessary considering the amount of cast changes there have been (two out of the 20 odd cast members) and again, this information can be looked up on the individual pages of characters. Bbmaniac (talk) 13:28, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Duration dates/Previous actor/s
Despite the message suggesting that character duration dates do not need to be included in the list, I'm confused as to why they shouldn't be included. Yes, as the message says, the duration dates are included in the character's own pages, but the same could be said about the "actor" and "previous actors" categories, as all of that information can be found on the individual pages as well. What baffles me more is the inclusion of the "previous actors" at all. Surely if duration dates are surplus information in a list of characters, then previous actors (a category not needed for most characters) is definitely unnecessary by the same token. Burbridge92 (talk) 23:07, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not sure if you would like durations adding or the previous actors removing. Rain  the 1  00:43, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

debut/return date
Well bit pointless discussing this seen as I obviously possess a view different to the person who wants the opposite, so it won't happen anyway, wasting my time really but as I've said with other shows such as Coronation Street, it's silly to have a debut/return date column when dates are not actually listed. Listing stuff such as '2012' or 'TBA' is just pointless and does not provide the reader with any better information. It's also unnecessary even if the dates were known as it should just be listing the characters who are departing. Do we list first appearance dates for present characters? No. If people want to see debut/return/departure dates, they just need to click on the character. It's not brain surgery. JackJackUK (talk) 18:44, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Malcolm
Malcolm is only a guest character, so should be in the guest character list not regular. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.43.120 (talk) 22:54, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * We don't downgrade characters. - JuneGloom    Talk  23:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Durations
I've been involved in this discussion about adding durations to the EastEnders cast list recently, and having helped come up with the implemented cast list, I wonder if it could work here too? I know there have been a fair few discussions and objections about the lack of durations in the tables, so this would obviously make a few people happy. Fortunately for Neighbours, Andrew and Summer have only been recast once, so the table won't have the big cell/whitespace that some of the EE characters have. Although people can go to articles if they want to know a character's duration, seeing them all here is a quick reference guide I guess. - JuneGloom    Talk  15:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I like it JG and it does make sense because it shall remove the column that is mostly unused - as you said only Summer and Andrew are the only two with previous actors and it won't really stretch the cells idividual cells. Rain  the 1  16:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well there was no objection and this has been present for a while. Just change it already. Rain  the 1  21:57, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think we should wait for one more opinion, but yes I think it's time to add the durations back. Also, would anyone object to the removal of the Notable cast list? It's basically a duplicate of the one in the main article, with a few more cast members listed. When the main article was going through it's GAR, I trimmed the notable cast members section down and later re-added them to this list. I just don't think they really belong here and I'm sure I've seen something about collapsible sections being "frowned upon" so to speak. - JuneGloom    Talk  00:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with both points. The notable list does seem more suited to the main article. Adamiow (talk) 13:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your opinions. I'll go implement the changes. - JuneGloom    Talk  14:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree with June and Rain.--5 albert square (talk) 22:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You wait for one editor and then two come along at once! 5asq, do you think the notable cast list in the article should go too? - JuneGloom    Talk  23:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Should go from this article but remain in the main Neighbours article.--5 albert square (talk) 00:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, that's what I meant. The one in the main article is fine. - JuneGloom    Talk  00:20, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

talk page archiving
Note, per request I have revised the talk page archiving on this page. Instead of being stored in monthly pages (like Talk:List_of_Neighbours_characters/Archives/2012/May), the talk pages will now just be stored in regular archive pages (like /Archive 1), up to 75k per page. I re-added all of the old talk here, so that the bot will re-archive it all tonite. I set it up to archive any threads older than 6 months, which should be sufficient given the traffic here. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 20:36, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Jordy Lucas future.

In January 2012 it was announced Jordy had signed a 2 new contract, that would keep her in Neighbours till 2014. http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s14/neighbours/interviews/a361367/neighbours-jordy-lucas-teases-new-summer-plots-interview.html

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/beauties-to-make-good-neighbours/story-e6frf96x-1226231405050

So TV WEEK maybe wrong about her leaving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.78.90.45 (talk) 00:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it was announced in December 2011 that she had signed a new contract. DS only mentioned it in Jan 2012 as part of the interview. Considering there was a quote from Jordy Lucas in the magazine, I doubt TV Week are wrong (just like they weren't wrong about Rebecca Breeds). Now please stop evading your block. - JuneGloom    Talk  00:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Update
You have not kept the site up to date. When will the wedding of Lucas and Vanessa as well as Hudson's arrest be added to this website? 110.32.70.205 (talk) 10:16, 20 September 2013 (UTC)Geoffrey Hilliard.
 * Feel free to update whatever you feel needs updating. - JuneGloom    Talk  00:52, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an open project and everyone is welcome to contribute. Neighbours content is miles ahead of most. Slightly ungrateful to keep complaining like this. Rain  the 1  01:44, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Sue Parker
Sue Parker is now listed as an "upcoming or returning" character. I see she appeared previously in 1986-7 when she went to school with Charlene, who's son is now in the cast. Is this why she's returning? 58.110.116.220 (talk) 12:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Geoffrey Hilliard
 * Maybe, though it's likely she's coming back for a different reason. Also, could you please not edit my userspace, thank you. - JuneGloom    Talk  22:53, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Nell Rebecchi a regular?
Why is Nell Rebecchi listed as a regular character? Her name doesn't always appear in the closing credits (only in the episodes she's in). When her name is in the closing credits, it appears last after the recurring characters. Plus, she doesn't have a character profile on the Neighbours website. I think Nell should be moved to the Recurring table. AusSoaps (talk) 23:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I would also like to point out that Nell was not credited in the last two episodes she appeared in (June 5th and 6th), so she's definitely not a regular. AusSoaps (talk) 23:35, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

She is a main now. B.Davis2003 (talk) 06:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No, she's not. I saw the closing credits of tonight's episode (October 24th) and Nell is still listed last with the other recurring characters. She hasn't been credited as a regular yet. Regulars are listed in the closing credits of every episode and as I said above, Nell's name is only listed in the episodes she appears in. AusSoaps (talk) 09:36, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Lou is out of the opening titles
Since all the regulars are only credited in the opening titles, does this mean Lou is now a recurring character? AusSoaps (talk) 21:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * As far as I'm aware he's still regular.--5 albert square (talk) 19:47, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Tom Oliver has reduced his workload. Rather than being a few months on then a few months off, he will now be recurring, with his next stint later in the year. It is a bit of a odd one, especially now he has been removed from the titles. Moving him to recurring, but then moving him back to regular when he back on may be a solution. Thoughts? Adamiow (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * A Neighbours spokesperson told Digital Spy: "Tom has scaled back his workload over the past few years and while he will not be appearing as regularly on Neighbours, good news for the many Lou Carpenter fans is the producers have persuaded him to continue to do guest appearances. Yep, it looks like he's a recurring character now. AusSoaps (talk) 23:36, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Given what AusSoaps has just posted, I'd say change to recurring now. I can see Tom giving up Neighbours in the not too distant future.--5 albert square (talk) 23:44, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Er guys, even if he has cut down on his hours, we don't downgrade characters. He has been a regular for over twenty years. Moving him to recurring does not reflect his entire stint on the show and points to WP:RECENTISM. - JuneGloom07    Talk  23:47, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Characters going from regular to recurring has happened in American soaps like Days of Our Lives. AusSoaps (talk) 02:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * June, Taking Lucy as an example, she is added to regulars when she is on and not on the list when she isn't. We could do the same with Lou, but as he is a more permanent cast member than her, I suggested keeping him in recurring when he isn't on and moving him to regular when he is on. What do you think? Adamiow (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. We can do it the same way with Lucy and say Lou's exit was on May 1. AusSoaps (talk) 22:50, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think anything should have been changed until this discussion was through. Question; if Lou was still in the opening credits, would we be having this discussion? I'll add more when I've had some sleep. - JuneGloom07    Talk  02:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

In short, no we wouldn't. Adamiow (talk) 13:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Is Bossy a regular character?
Since Bouncer and Bouncer 2 are included in Wikipedia as characters, does that mean Bossy is a character too? She's also credited in the opening titles so is she a regular character? AusSoaps (talk) 06:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oops, just realised that Bossy has her own character profile at List of Neighbours characters (2012). Since no one replied, I will be adding Bossy to the regular table. If Bouncer was a regular then Bossy is too. AusSoaps (talk) 21:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Patience is a virtue. Editors are in different time zones and have real-life commitments, you need to give them more of a chance to see and join in with the discussion. - JuneGloom07    Talk  21:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok June, thanks. AusSoaps (talk) 22:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I am not too sure about this one. She is a dog, fictional she may be I do not see Bossy as a regular character. When she was stealing from the washing lines it was more a comedy side plot that made way for comic relief for Kyle/Georgia/Sheila/Susan/Karl. Pets in soap operas appear more as recurring additions to a cast. Compare that to cartoons where the dogs have their own voice, life and stories at the fore - Scooby, Brian, etc. Bossy just causes background noise in comparison. Her appearance in the titles does blur the lines here. Rain  the 1  00:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Serious question: if Dahl was in the opening credits or Patches (Amber's horse), should/would they be added to the table too? What if they didn't have any development info whatsoever (or their own entry)? - JuneGloom07    Talk  02:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Haha! This actually makes me feel stupid, you have given it context. Bossy is not a regular character, she is Kyle's dog only. Bossy has not got a set of storylines mapped out and a team of writers developing the character. The dog is used for other characters as a convenience plot filler. Rain  the 1  03:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * According to the opening titles Bossy is a regular and she even has her own character profile on the Neighbours website. Bossy did have a storyline last year when she got bitten by a snake. AusSoaps (talk) 06:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Hopefully other editors have an opinion and voice it because we cannot seem to reach a decision at present. Rain  the 1  09:31, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, no, not a regular character. Like Rain has said, not had a team of writers developing the character.  Bossy is used as a plot filler only whereas Bouncer wasn't.--5 albert square (talk) 10:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about adding Bossy to the regulars table. If she is to be included, she should be in the recurring characters section. I think she's in the credits as it makes that scene a little more interesting and appealing, not because she's a regular. She certainly doesn't appear as regularly as the characters that appear beside her. Look at Bossy's profile again. It's not about the fictional Bossy, it's about the dog who plays her. You can learn a lot about her life off-set, but there's nothing there about Bossy's storylines or character development. Compare it to some of the other characters. I did take a look through the archives at WP:SOAPS, but this hasn't come up before. So, if we hit a stalemate, we could try posting there. - JuneGloom07    Talk  21:14, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Instead of edit warring, you need to join in/continue the discussion to help gain consensus. - JuneGloom07    Talk  00:33, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I've already said what I needed to say. I'm reverting a user's unexplained removal because we shouldn't make changes to the article until a consensus has been reached. AusSoaps (talk) 05:46, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You didn't explain to SDD17 why you were undoing their edits though. They had no idea there was a discussion because you didn't leave an edit summary or a note on their talk page. There are outstanding questions/points that have been raised above, but not answered. - JuneGloom07    Talk  01:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Edit summary and talk page notice. AusSoaps (talk) 05:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The one edit summary you left and the warning didn't mention the talk page discussion. I left them a note after I noticed that it hadn't been mentioned to them. Anyway, let's move on. I think Bossy should be removed from the regulars table. She is essentially a live prop, and the snake storyline was to bring Kyle and Georgia's relationship woes back to the forefront again.  do you guys have any further input into this discussion? -  JuneGloom07    Talk  00:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I still say she's not a regular character. Bossy is essentially a prop filler, she's not like Bouncer and having a team of people developing her.--5 albert square (talk) 19:45, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Since three other users agree Bossy is a recurring character, I've moved her to the recurring table. AusSoaps (talk) 22:10, 13 September 2015 (UTC)