Talk:List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters/Archive 1

Dale Horvath
Regarding this statement in the Dale Horvath section: "Due to his age, survival skills, and rifle marksmanship, Dale may very well be a Vietnam Veteran much like his comic book counterpart, although this has not yet been revealed in the show." This is speculation non-encyclopedic. Recommend removing. &mdash;  X   S   G   08:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambig?
I'm wondering if we shouldn't rename this article or put a hatnote on it or something. I just noticed that the article for the comic characters has almost the same name: List of characters in The Walking Dead. We do mention the comic series and link to it but it seems like a hatnote or something might be prudent. I don't deal with disambig stuff very often though, so I wasn't sure. Millahnna (talk) 17:55, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * They should honestly just be merged together. There's really no need for two pages with almost identical information. --DocNox (talk) 00:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No. With characters present in the television series that are not in the comic books, and vice versa, as well as the divergences in relationships, portrayals, etc., it is best that the two lists be separate. Just as there is a list of characters for the Southern Vampire Mysteries and a list for True Blood, there are clear differences between the paths the two casts follow. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 02:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with Pejorative. Even though there inevitably exists some overlap between the characters in the comics vs. the TV series, they are not synonymous. I would sway towards keeping the two articles separate, but perhaps renaming them (disambig) to clarify that article A is for the comic characters and article B is for the TV series characters. Darwin&#39;s Bulldog (talk) 01:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Those True Blood and Southern Vampire Mysteries pages are almost as badly written as these are, so I'm not sure that's a very good comparison. The point of these articles should not be to list every single character that has ever appeared and every little thing they have done, but it should be to provide real world information on those characters that are notable enough to even have any. Just because a character appeared in the comic or show doesn't mean they deserve to be on this page. Unless you can find real world information on them they shouldn't be here at all, and I'll venture to guess you'll have a hard time finding any outside the main characters. You might have a better chance with the TV characters since there are actors who have probably done interviews about them. But really most of this stuff would be much better placed on the Walking Dead wikia. Please see WP:NOTABILITY and WP:PLOT. I also see the comic character page has had a notability tag on it since August 2009 and still hasn't been fixed. It was also deleted because of this and only recently recreated, but as far as I can tell all the things that got it deleted are still true. My merge proposal was in the interest of making the page better as I honestly don't want to see it deleted again. We should not be describing every single differing plot point between the comics and the show. The characters are still essentially the same despite different things happening to them. --DocNox (talk) 05:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I also don't see any compelling reason why these two lists should be separate. Kuralyov (talk) 03:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I dont know if they, the tv series and the comic book, will run hand in hand all that often. It has been noted that the character Shane has already been killed off n the book, whereas in the tv show he is still on. While the characters do follow the book, the show has some differences. It would be needed to explain the difference between the book and the show. Lurchman (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC) No to merge It seems pretty obvious that the TV show and the comic should have separate articles unless they are nearly identical (which I think would be extremely unlikely, but others will have to answer that). There's never been any question about this in similar situations, and obviously the comic and the TV series are each notable in themselves. --11:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The two should not be merged. one is talking about the comic book series and the other about a tv show. they are both very different things that should stay separated. there are some people in the comic book series that haven't shown up in the tv show, like Michonne and the Governor. 99.129.93.94 (talk) 17:46, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I think merging could be a feasible option, but if there's a consensus against it, could we at least rename the two pages to List of characters in The Walking Dead (TV series) and List of characters in The Walking Dead (comic series), or something similar? The current names make opening the right list a bit of a guessing game. Frickative  00:15, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I believe the discussion should be put to rest. Four major characters already have different plotlines, either existing long after or leaving long before their counterparts in the other media. It is not known if minor characters will return, other character development be seriously changed, etc. Other characters have not appeared at all. Also given Darabont's departure and the known production issues significant further plot developments in the comic series may never appear in the television adaptation. A combined character list could easily be too cumbersome and unwieldy. So my vote is still no to merge. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 03:10, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I renamed the article "List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters". If it isn't being merged, it has to be clearly distinguished from List of characters in The Walking Dead. Barsoomian (talk) 10:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't. Since Season 2 began airing, a lot of different things have been happening to the TV series character that are not happening to their comic counterparts. Sophia doesn't even die and Dale is killed earlier. It's best not to merge them at all. I see no information about their TV counterparts being mentioned in List of characters in The Walking Dead as well. Bleubeatle (talk) 03:50, 29 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd like to suggest that the current "List of The Walking Dead Characters" be deleted, and that "List of characters in the Walking Dead" be renamed "List of the Walking Dead Characters". Since the TV show and the comic book are sometimes different, every in universe differentiation between the two should be indicated within this new, unified article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.69.228.217 (talk) 04:09, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Glenn
Removing Glenn's ethnic identification of "Korean American". This is not done for any of the other characters, like T-Dog for example, and there is no reason to mention this as if it is so unusual or strange that it deserves special mention. Let's cut down on the "forever foreign" stereotype one piece at a time, shall we? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.122.95 (talk) 02:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

renamed and reverted
Regarding these bold edits: 10:58, 7 November 2012‎ Neelix (Neelix moved page List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters to List of The Walking Dead cast members: This is as much a list of cast members as it is a list of characters, and makes for a cleaner title.) 11:38, 7 November 2012‎ Barsoomian (Barsoomian moved page List of The Walking Dead cast members to List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters over redirect: It's about the characters, not the actors) I reverted the rename because it's primarily about the characters, not the actors who portray them. Aside from naming the actors, everything else is about what happens in the stories. Nothing about the "cast" per se.Barsoomian (talk) 03:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Not accurate
but Dale convinces Andrea not to

He didn't convince her to leave, he guilts her into not letting him die there. 69.158.167.3 (talk) 07:51, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's how he "convinced" her. Anyway, we don't have to analyse every scene in forensic detail. Leave that to the reviewers. Barsoomian (talk) 13:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal
The page List of The Walking Dead (TV Series) characters is practically a duplicate of this article. The only difference in the title, is the capitalization of the word "series", and per Wikipedia policy it should NOT be capitalized. Since both lists are large and may have had different information added to them, they should be merged instead of doing a simple redirect, so that no original information is missed. Fortdj33 (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2012 (UTC) I don't think its a bright idea. There are many characters in comics not in the show, and ice versa. It will complicate thngs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James646 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * As said in WT:WikiProject Television, there is no need to worry, as this is a simple case of "cut-and-paste" edit. Maybe this section should be blanked. --George Ho (talk) 21:02, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree 100% with the merger proposal. The individual descriptions of the characters can specify major differences between the characters in the television show and comic books. This one's a no brainer. —  Hun ter   Ka  hn  15:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - This split is a bit silly. For the most part, the lists are identical. If there are differences, it is better to have them in right next to each other than on two different pages. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  00:40, 10 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - the two cover the same territory. If there are TV-only (or comics-only) characters then it can be flagged up in the list. Seems like there is a consensus to sort this out. (Emperor (talk) 02:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC))
 * Oppose As was argued above earlier this year, the characters in the TV show and comics are diverging, and there are many with no counterparts. Both articles are substantial enough and different enough to be individual articles. Barsoomian (talk) 02:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose - For the reasons previously stated. Froid 11:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

In TWD (TV series), The Governor's black henchman is SHUMPERT (not "Bowman")
Some editors are referring to "Shumpert" as "Bowman", but that is incorrect. Consequently, I've changed it back, cited AMC-TV as a source documenting the character's name and photo, and added to the character's description an explanation that some fans who don't know the character's name refer to him as "the bowman" or "Bowman". - Froid 00:50, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Hershel and Carol
The discuss for these characters can be found here. - Dracuns (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so aside from their twitters, here is an official confirmation via TVLine (a major entertainment news site) that Melissa McBride and Scott Wilson are both series regulars - not recurring guest stars like they're currently listed as being : http://tvline.com/2013/04/04/walking-dead-melissa-mcbride-series-regular/ - Molcoo (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Character pages
Pages now exist for the following characters: -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Rick Grimes
 * Shane Walsh
 * Lori Grimes
 * Daryl Dixon
 * Andrea
 * The Governor
 * FYI, this list is continually expanding, as seen in the increasing number of wikilinked characters' names within the List of The Walking Dead characters and List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters articles. Froid (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Worked on building various character articles
I just spent about a month adding sources to various TWD characters. I focused mostly on dead characters (since they won't be making any more appearances, outside of flashbacks or voices on the phone), as well as a few like Tyreese and Martinez who haven't appeared much yet, but probably will next season. Rick, Shane, and Andrea were already pretty well developed so I didn't really touch those. I did not work on Daryl, Glenn, Hershel, Maggie, Lori, Carl, or the Governor, and I probably won't – those should have more than enough material to work with for any enterprising editor who wants to take them on. I thought about doing something with Michonne, Carol, and Beth, and maybe I will eventually, but I need a break. :)  If you want to check it out, I think my best work appears under Dale, Merle, and T-Dog.  I got all of my sources by looking at the episode pages for reviews and interviews, and in some cases I found sources on the actors' pages.  If an episode's article had only a few sources to go by, then I may not have been able to do much for a  character's important appearance in that episode. BOZ (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Listing characters in a table was a bad move, and I'm undoing that
The table format removes characters' names from the article's TOC (making individual characters harder to find, especially for readers who are unsure of what categories specific characters belong to) and makes the character entries harder to edit. In another unwise move that contributed to making the characters harder to find, whoever created the table inappropriately ordered the characters, within their respective groupings, in the cast list order, rather than alphabetically. Since this article is supposed to serve as a user-friendly resource to describe each character, I'm going to remove the tables and alphabetize the characters within their respective groupings. - Froid (talk) 21:00, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Finished! FYI, I preserved the table header content for each character, in bullet form. Please don't replace the table or reorder the characters (except alphabetically) within categories. Froid (talk) 22:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

The "Southern" Dixon Brothers.
Why are the Dixon brothers the only characters listed as Southern (one as a Southern "redneck", the other as a Southern racist). The series takes place in Georgia, and it is obvious from location, context and speech patterns that most, if not all, of the main characters are of southeastern US origin. Main characters such as Rick, Maggie and the Governor all have obvious Georgian accents, yet they are not listed as "Southern"? It is bigoted to list 'Southern' as a descriptor that is only associated with the negative stereotypes of being racist or a redneck (a derogatory term for a person from the rural South or Mid-West). I believe that this should be changed. Perhaps all the characters who are of Southern origin should be listed so, or if origin is of specific relevance to the Dixon brothers, maybe their sections should be re-worded so that the Southern descriptor is not used in a way that propagates negative stereotypes. I tentatively plan on making the change myself, but I'll wait a few days before making the changes I suggest to see if anyone has a valid argument against my suggestion. AJseagull1 (talk) 09:26, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


 * In the episode in which Merle and Daryl are on their own, it is revealed they are familiar with the territory from their days pre-ZA. Therefore, I'd list them as southern rednecks, and specify that Merle is a racist and misogynist southern redneck. Whenever characters' origins are made known, those origins should be specified (Glenn and Jacqui hail from Atlanta; the Grimes family and Shane hail from Kings County, GA; the Greene family, Otis, Patricia, Jimmy, and Randall Culver hail from Georgia; and Dave and Tony, from "Nebraska" episode, hail from Pennsylvania). Froid 11:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Your first sentence seems to suggest you think "southern" and "redneck" are interchangeable descriptors, which they are not. In conversation it would probably be more appropriate to call Merle "redneck" because you would want to insult him while calling attention to parallels between his character and the "dumb racist southerner" stereotype. In an encyclopedia article, however, it's inappropriate in all cases for an editor to make that derogatory judgment (unless evidence can be found to call him a "self-professed 'redneck'," for example). Took it out. --Rhododendrites (talk) 15:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Table color/change rationale
Not sure how other people view the table, but black text on dark blue and dark purple come across to me on my monitors as illegible. Someone keeps changing it back and added a note to please not alter the table's appearance. So here's my suggested revision of the table - for clarity and readability. I'd like to hear from others about whether this version or the version currently on the page is easier to view. Also, if people are wanting the table to only list characters/actors that have been (or currently are) "starring" as opposed to just "appearances" then that should be made clear in the description of the table. That may prevent others from just listing every single actor/character to appear. Pejorative.majeure (talk) 12:52, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Key: = Starring
 * Key: = Recurring
 * Key: = Starring (credited as "also starring")
 * Key:  = Guest/Cameo

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2014
Glenn was thought to have escaped on the bus, but later was found out to has left in search for Maggie, and ended up still at the prison. He gathers supplies and fled the prison with Tara.

68.197.64.6 (talk) 02:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (t • e • c) 02:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Everyone on the bus known to be dead???
Does anyone know if there is any solid evidence (reliably sourced) that everyone on the bus is known to be dead? has repeatedly changed Jeanette's status as dead based on the assumption that everyone on the bus is known to be dead. Do we have more than opinions and speculation at this point? Thanks. 107.15.200.87 (talk) 03:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

"Appearances" table (background colors)
On a number of occasions, the background colors in the table have been changed from #aaaaff ("Main" credited as "also staring") to #ffaaaa ("Main"). Many of these edits are being made by IPs and do not have an edit sum. Many of them also seem to apply to Season 5. I've been reverting these edits because no rationale is provided for said changes I'm pretty sure they are meant in good faith, but just seem to be a little premature. I think its probably best to wait until Season 5 has aired before for making these changes, unless proper sources can be provided in support. It's not only this article, but other Walking Dead-related articles where such changes are being made without edit sums or sources. Please discuss. Thanks in advance. - Marchjuly (talk) 00:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

References cleanup
The List of The Walking Dead (TV series) characters needs some cleanup. There's some missing parameters, bare urls, inconsistent date formats, etc., etc. This is not really a big job and doesn't change any of the content at all, but I just thought I'd ask if this article has a preferable citation style per WP:CITEVAR before taking a crack at cleaning things up. One "serious" (not a cleanup issue) issue is that "reference #10" cites Wikipedia which is something that is not allowed per WP:WPNOTRS, so I think this should be removed. - Marchjuly (talk) 21:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Gareth
regarding the summary for Gareth was made by. I undid the edit per WP:UNSOURCED because the information added seemed to be based upon some rumor. The information was re-added by  only to  be removed once again  by.

FWIW, I have not read the comic book and only know the show from what I see on TV, but I agree with MartinezMD that Wikipedia is not really the place for rumors and other non-verifiable information. Even if the information is "true", it should not be added unless it can be verified. The last paragraph of MOS:PLOT begins as follows: ''Presenting fictional material from the original work is allowed, provided passages are short, are given the proper context, and do not constitute the main portion of the article. If such passages stray into the realm of interpretation, per WP:PRIMARY, secondary sources must be provided to avoid original research. Plot summaries cannot engage in interpretation and should only present an obvious recap of the work.'' I think it's fair to assume that "plot summaries" would include "character summaries", but that is just my interpretation.

So, if it can be confirmed through reliable secondary or third-party sources that Gareth is a "remix of the comic book character [Chris]", then that can be added and supported by the relevant source. If there is a reliable third-party source which says "it is rumored that Gareth is 'Chris'", then that information can be added as long as it just reports what the source says per WP:SYN; for example, "Time Magazine claims that Gareth is rumored to be Chris". Otherwise, such information is simply "original research" or "synthesis" and should not be re-added once it has been removed per WP:BURDEN. - Marchjuly (talk) 04:51, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I initially removed the edit specifically because of the use of 'rumor' and that it was unsourced. The interview with the actor is enough for me now (this isn't an article on rocket science) and I edited it and put it back in but I will defer to the others on this.MartinezMD (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input . I had two concerns: (1) the wording "It is rumored..." still seems a little like synthesis. In my opinion it would be better to say "In an interview, XXX said..." or "According to the "Hollywood Reporter", ...." just to make it seem like reported fact and not somebody's original research; (2) the information comes from an interview which could be considered a problem per WP:Primary. You fixed (1) with your edit, but still not sure about (2). A primary source might be OK if we were talking about some factual, but not sure if it is OK in this situation because we are talking about somebody's conjecture/interpretation. The question in the Hollywood Reporter source "Looking at the comics, Gareth is a remix of Chris, the head of the Hunters. How much of the comic did you read to prepare for the role?" is kinda leading in my opinion. The response seems simply to be the actor's interpretation of "who that character is based upon" and not a definitive statement by the creator of the character that the character is based upon so and so. I agree this article is not "rocket science", but I am wondering if the wording "based upon" is still too strong because it implies the information is an established, verifiable fact. Just my take on things. - Marchjuly (talk) 21:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * What about "Andrew West has stated that the character Gareth is based on Chris the hunter from the comic series." or something like that. This was a suggestion made by at WT:TV. My only suggestion for improving that statement would be to add "in an interview" somewhere. - Marchjuly (talk) 21:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I changed the prose to read "Andrew West has stated that the character is based on Chris the hunter from the comic series." This statement is true, doesn't rely on interpretation, is supported by references, and leaves open the possibility that writers or the director might have a differing view. My edit summary was "There's no reason why we shouldn't attribute the assertions to the person who made the assertions."  My edit was reverted by IP 130.245.251.83 in this edit who wrote "yes there is... reason being, gareth is confirmed to be a remix of a comic book character, and all evidence points to it being chris the hunter."  I don't find the IP's comment to be particularly helpful. I didn't argue that the character isn't based on Chris the hunter, I only attributed the confirmation to the guy who confirmed it.  For that reason, I have restored the prose with a slight clarification, and if the IP has a problem, they should voice it here since their revert rationale was incoherent. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I can vouch for IP 130.245.251.83. The statement should read "Gareth is based off of Chris from the comic series." and here are a few reasons why. First off, Gareth was confirmed in an interview beforehand that he was a remix of a character FROM the comic, but they didn't say anything else. And, even without the actor having to say anything about it, ALL evidence points to it being chris, If you need more evidence, take this  And this article reinforces it by talking about how close the season so far is sticking to the comic


 * So you would have to be a fool not to think that this is 100% accurate. If this is what accounts for original research, then OR definitely deserves more merit than it's given around here. I believe in wikipedia, and its potential, but this isn't the law; like you said rocket science, just put this in application.


 * Wikipedia is where people go to get quick and good info right? If some noob was reading about the walking dead and just wanted to know more about gareth who doesn't read the comics, (and it doesn't hurt for wikipedia to sound as resourceful as possible), why not have the sentence read "Gareth is based off of Chris from the comic series."?? Reading that sentence, it is not inaccurate or untruthful at all. Here's another article


 * peace Osh33m (talk) 06:47, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments and links . Personally, I think Wikipedia strives to be a place where people go to get quick and good info that can be verified by reliable third-party sources. All articles, regardless of subject matter, should strive to be in accordance with Wikipedia's three core content policies as much as possible. Wikipedia articles are not intended to be fansites or forums to discuss/debate the latest "rumors" or "theories" about a particular topic. In this particular case, unsourced information was added by an IP editor, so I removed it per WP:UNSOURCED. The same unsourced information was then re-added by a different IP editor only to be removed once again as "rumor" by . The same information was then re-added by a third IP editor, only this time with sources provided, but the wording was questionable. It was removed again, incorrectly if I may say, but was promptly re-added by, who reworded it to make it sound more encyclopedic. further improved the wording by attributing the information to the person who said it. That is we are at right now.
 * The information comes from a Hollywood Reporter interview with Andrew West, who could easily be considered to be a "primary source". WP:Interview begins by saying, "Interviews are generally reliable for the fact that the interviewees said something, but not necessarily for the fact that what they said is accurate. The publications are merely repeating their comments word for word. No matter how highly respected the publication is, they are not presenting the material as having been checked for accuracy; they are just saying that this is what the interviewee said. In this sense, interviews should be treated like self-published material." This is why, in my opinion, we need to say "Andrew West has stated that the character is based on Chris the hunter from the comic series." or something similar if we want to use his interview as a source. In other words, we can add information about what West said because that is factual and supported by the source; we cannot, however, take what West said and tweak it, even slightly, to match our take on things even if we "know" our take is 100% accurate because it would still be "our" take.
 * I haven't had the time to go through the other websites you've listed, but you don't need me to verify them. If you feel they satisfy WP:RS and can write what they say in an encyclopedic tone, then be WP:BOLD, pick up where Cyphoidbomb left off and continue to improve the section. If you'd rather get some feedback from others first, then post here and see if you get any suggestions. Nothing about Wikipedia is the law, and nobody needs to be vouched for when they edit, even IPs; It just sometimes helps to avoid problems when we editors try to edit within community-accepted policies and guidelines because it makes things less antagonistic and more collaborative. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * nails it. The only two sources that were presented were interviews with Andrew West, a primary source. If there are other sources that meet WP:RS that support this content as an independent reliable source, the content can be expanded. But as presented currently, the statement should be attributed to West. And the IP's response was not a sufficient argument. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:51, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * , thank you for the reply.I too would like to make wikipedia less antagonistic and more collaborative. I understand where you're coming from and what you're trying to tell me, but that is why I came up with all those other sources. Some of them are interviews which talk about how gareth is indeed a remix of a comic book character, but the creators would not reveal anything else. some of the other sources are comic-to-screen comparisons of how close chris's lines are to gareth's on the show. So once, more, I think the statement reading "Gareth is based off of Chris from the comic series" would not hurt at all, is 100% accurate. So if no one else has a problem with it, I will change it back. and, I don't know what to say to you except did you skip over my entire paragraph? where I left more sources for people to see? I was not talking about the IP's response, I was talking about mine and merely vouching for the IP. Osh33m (talk) 16:01, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I've searched each of the links you've provided above for the word "Chris" and I don't see where in the other sources anyone states definitively that the character of Gareth is based on Chris. Please edify me. The Yahoo source hints at it, but gets stymied with Kirkman's response "I can tell you nothing about him." The THR source hints vaguely at Gareth being based on a character from the comic, but they also don't name who the character is based on. I assume you are asking us to interpret meaning from the two Walking Dead websites and the random Jpeg? Sorry, we can't do that in an encyclopedia.  The Wetpaint source has locked me out unless I log in with Facebook, which I am not interested in doing.  What we are trying to avoid is drawing conclusions that are not expressly stated by any one source.  So far, the two sources that say explicitly that Gareth = Chris, are the interviews with West, and I think the claim should be attributed to him. So yes, I do object, particularly since it appears that we are heading down the path of synthesis, specifically using multiple sources to arrive at conclusions that aren't expressly stated in any of them. And for the record, I think it's very likely that the character of Gareth is based on Chris, but from an encyclopedic standpoint, I believe we need explicit confirmation from reliable secondary sources, not speculation and interpretation.  Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:19, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Like said above, I think we should be careful and try not to synthesize what we read in various sources into a single representative voice in the article. If "Gareth" is based upon "Chris" (as seems to be the case), then there is a good chance that a definite confirmation will come out in the not too distant future, isn't there? At that time, the text can be written accordingly citing the new source. This discussion will remain on record and the diffs from the article will still be there, so such a change would not be controversial. Since season 5 is currently ongoing, maybe those in charge of the show just don't want to officially "let the cat out of the bag" so to speak until it is over. I think that fans of the show have plenty of places to go if they want to keep up on the latest rumors, theories, etc. about the show and its characters, so I think we should try to keep Wikipedia as representative of the cited sources as much as possible. Sources Nos. 3, 4, 5 seems questionable to me, two of them have the show's name in their url which means they are most likely primary sources, and the other is a jpeg which is not much help. The "Wet Paint" article actually makes reference to the two interviews (THR and TV Guide) given by West referred to above and uses more than half the page to quote statements from those interviews. It also cites the show's official website. WP makes no 100% definite statement on it's own that "Gareth" is "Chris"; it says "The hooded figure, and Gareth's jacket, look very similar to Chris and The Hunters of Issue 63, and you can compare Chris/Gareth's speeches here." or  "The speech he gave in The Walking Dead Season 5, Episode 2, was very similar to the one Chris, leader of The Hunters, gave to Dale in The Walking Dead comic books." or "TWD Season 5 is meant to follow the comic book storyline closer than ever, while still giving us little just-for-TV detours like the Beth hospital storyline, and remixing things like giving Bob the storyline Dale had in the books." These are, in my opinion, just interpretations and not a clear cut statement that Gareth is based upon Chris. Just my take on things. - Marchjuly (talk) 23:59, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * @ well first off, if gareth was absolutely not a remix of a comic character than kirkman would've said, "no, he is a brand new character made originally for the tv show." he didn't want to say "yes, he is a remix of a comic book character" but he wanted his statement to be interpreted as just not knowing anything about gareth at all to leave everything as suspenseful as possible. that's why he chose to say, nothing. THR does not say who the remixed character is but literally ALL the evidence is pointing to chris. also, the jpeg is not so random; their scans from the comic book. gareth's speech to bob was at least 60% the same as chris's was to dale. not only that, but chris was the leader of the hunters in the comics, and gareth is now the leaders of the hunters on the tv show. not only THAT. the actor himself says it. so it is not only he who is a source for this topic, it also the source material itself; the comics. you say we need concrete confirmation and not speculation or interpretation, but what other way is there to interpret all of these similarities? If you are wondering where I found the "random jpeg," here is the source for that.


 * @ i've added where i found the jpeg, and the other websites specifically compare chris's speech from the comic to gareth's speech on the show just to show how similar they are, among other similarities pointing out how close season 5 has been to the comic so far. and bro, the cat is definitely out of the bag at this point. hardcore walking dead fans already know chris=gareth so to speak. enough of the hunters arc from the comics has already been delineated for them to know. and those who watch only the show and are hungry to find out more at this point also know it since all this entertainment media has covered it, and the conversation with andrew west. and yes, maybe one day soon scott gimple will come out and say "Gareth is a remix of sorts of Chris from the comics." And if/when that day comes, ask yourself, "would it have hurt to have that already stated on wikipedia in the first place?" and you're right, those who want to want to keep up with the latest rumors and spoilers etc have plenty of places to go, but this topic right here is hardly a rumor anymore come on, but what i'm trying to say is if they read on here that Gareth is a remix of Chris, the reader would think 'oh yeah so wikipedia is up to date on facts as well' (because it pretty much is fact man). Osh33m (talk) 07:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All of what you say is probably true, but on Wikipedia "true" and "verifiable by reliable sources" are not essentially one in the same. At the very top of every page that is being edited it says "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." It does not say "Encyclopedic content must be pretty much verifiable. Something that is pretty much fact, is not fact yet, and sounds like synthesis or original research to me. Wikipedia is not speculation and it is not a newspaper.  Wikipedia is not in a race to be the first to report on something that has happened or predict something that likely may happen; It only reports on events after they have been properly verified through reliable sources, preferably reliable third-party sources. The last two sentences of WP:UNDUE say "Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public. If you can prove a theory that few or none currently believe, Wikipedia is not the place to present such a proof. Once it has been presented and discussed in reliable sources, it may be appropriately included. See 'No original research' and 'Verifiability'." I hope what you understand that I am not trying to be a jerk and completely dismiss your suggestion; I am only just trying to explain using Wikipolicy and guidelines why I think it does not, at least at this time, belong in the the article. I am, however, not infallible and I may be being too pedantic here and thus unable to see the forest for the trees. The discussion does not have to end here; If you want the opinions of others as to whether the links you have given above satisfy WP:RS, then you can ask at WP:RSN. Likewise, if you think that I and  simply are not hearing what you are saying, then there are various options spelled out at WP:DR that you can choose to pursue. You, Cyphoidbomb and I seem to share the same goal of trying to make Wikipedia the best it can be; We just disagree on how to do that in this particular case. - Marchjuly (talk) 11:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Mentioning specific seasons/episodes
has maybe me wonder about something. How should references to specific seasons/episodes be worded in the article? Should the be treated as common nouns and sentence case used or should they be treated as proper nouns and title case used? In addition, MOS:NUMERAL says that numbers from one to ten should generally be written out, but there are lots of numbers being used throughout this article.

WP:TVLISTLEAD gives the lead from the List of The O.C. episodes as a good example to follow. Sentence case is used and numbers are written out. Should that be the same way it is done here? If there is no one "right" way that we are to follow, then maybe some kind of consensus should be reached so as to eliminate the inconsistencies that currently exist. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Status
The status column should be removed from the tables per WP:INUNIVERSE, "Using past tense when discussing the plot or any of its elements (except backstory), rather than the historical present tense". Fictional characters are not "dead"; if I watch the first episode of the series, Shane is alive, Lori is alive, etc. This is against Wikipedia's policy regarding fictional subjects. Drovethrughosts (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Makes sense to me - there is a lot of edit-warring and speculation and such over those anyway. 65.126.152.254 (talk) 15:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Drove is correct - for this same reason we write episode summaries in present tense, among other things. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:02, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Main vs. Minor
I don't understand the distinction made here between main and minor characters. Why is Gareth a main character when he only appeared in a few episodes but Judith and T-Dog are considered minor characters even though they had/have a much bigger presence on the show and over several seasons? Also, Martin is missing from the charts and I'm not sure how the actor was credited (guest? also starring?) so he should probably be listed since the charts list even characters appearing in very few episodes. Liz Read! Talk! 12:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * It's based on how the actor is billed that determines main vs. guest or recurring, just like any other TV series. If an actor is in the opening credits = main character; if an actor is credited as a guest star = guest/recurring character. However, The Walking Dead makes this quite difficult, because beyond the actors that receive opening credits billing (who are main characters), several actors receive the "also starring" credit (the "guest starring" credit is only used in season 1), which in of itself, has both series regulars and guest actors being credited under it. Like, for example, in season 5, Sonequa Martin-Green, Josh McDermitt, Alanna Masterson (and some others) are also series regulars credited under "also starring", but then you have Tyler James Williams, Ross Marquand and Tovah Feldshuh also billed under "also starring", but are guest actors. What's makes the difference is that if even if the actor does not appear in an episode, they are credited, thus series regulars. Gareth (Andrew J. West) is an interesting one, given his short tenure, however is considered series regular (for season 5) given this and the fact that Andrew J. West is not listed under the guest actors for episode guides on the AMC website. T-Dog (IronE Singleton) has always been a confusing one, but the actor did not receive credit when he did not appear, and there's no source that states he was ever a series regular. Sorry for the long-winded explanation, but I've never seen a series which such different type of crediting for the actors. And for Martin, I'm assuming you're referring to the character Chris Coy played in season 5, he is listed under the supporting characters, where he should be. Drovethrughosts (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Why is a list article necessary?
I asked a similar question at Talk:List of The Walking Dead (comics) characters, but what value does this list article have that the articles about each character listed here do not? Why do we need both? —174.141.182.82 (talk) 05:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * A lot of television shows have list pages for characters. It's so all information can be in one place for quick access and not every character that appears on a show is notable for a page of their own. List pages usually contain condensed information about the characters and link to character pages for further information. Brocicle (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Chart with character appearances
Would it be possible to get this back with the amount of appearances each Main and "Also Starring" character has appeared in? I know this was deleted when those two articles were merged. I personally think it's very interesting to see which characters have appeared in the most and least episodes since this is a show that will sometimes not show certain characters for episodes at a time.Svrodgers (talk) 04:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Per WP:TVCAST we do not include episode counts. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 07:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Correct tables
Placing the template for the character table here as there has been vandalism on this table twice today. Tired of resetting it manually seeing as I can't revert it simply as additional changes were made upon the initial major change. This is - somewhat - what the table should look like, give or take a few capitalization and color mistakes, but this is the original format majority of editors agreed upon.

Main cast b
 List indicator(s)
 * {{legend|#ddffdd|A green cell indicates the actor as a main cast member.}}
 * {{legend|#ddffff|A geen cell indicates the actor as a also starring/main cast member.}}
 * {{legend|#fdd|A red cell indicates the actor as a recurring cast member.}}
 * {{legend|#add8e6|A blue cell indicates the actor as guest cast member.}}
 * {{legend|#ddf|A lilac cell indicates the actor as a special guest cast member.}}
 * {{legend|lightgrey|A grey cell indicates the actor has not participated in the respective season.}}


 * scope="row" | Lauren Cohan
 * Maggie Greene
 * colspan="1" N/A
 * Crecurring
 * colspan="6" Cmain
 * colspan="6" Cmain

Recurring cast
Cheers. MSMRHurricane (talk) 22:23, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-Protect the page
I don't know how to do it, so I'm asking if someone could please semi-protect this page, due to the persistent vandalism that the same person is doing over and over again every single day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrebodart (talk • contribs) 16:56, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Serious spelling and grammatical issues with this page.
On 22nd November, I edited parts of this page (including the Rick section). I did this as a significant portion of the article is written in broken English; and anyone who takes more than 5 minutes to read it will see that. However after I changed it the user “Chairhandler” changed it back to the previous version. Meaning the article is now in broken English. The user claimed there were too many unnecessary details, yet again if he compared my edit to the previous version he would understand I was mostly just correcting the near unreadable state of this article. Quite frankly I am annoyed my time has been wasted trying to fix the article only for it to be restored to its abysmal state. Can someone please look into this. Alexxela99 (talk) 07:01, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * 922526 v9 ba.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Enver Gjokaj.jpg

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2021
When you mentioned suvivores of the Alexandria Safe-Zone you forgot to mention Tobin, played by Jason Douglas, he was a survivor and helper and was also a short lover for Carol, he later died after getting hit with an arrow covered by the blood of walkers KYLOGwiki (talk) 13:56, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. This is not a list of "every trivial appearance by a supernumerary actor, especially not if there is no mention of this in non-primary sources (since Wikipedia is not a fansite) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Season 11
Their isnt any of the season 11 characters on this list. It should at least include the more main characters like mercer or pamela milton. 2601:40C:8380:C40:F098:B9E4:55F1:8A23 (talk) 00:42, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Merge secondary chacters with little reception here
A merge has been suggested by User:BOZ (following my WP:PROD) of Alden (The Walking Dead), Aaron (The Walking Dead)‎, Olivia (The Walking Dead)‎ and Jadis (The Walking Dead)‎. Thoughts? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I would second the PRODs and I don't think there's anything meaningful to merge. This list is over detailed as is, and would have more appropriate WP:WEIGHT if it focused on major recurring characters. But I am usually amenable to some sort of middle ground between a stand-alone article and outright deletion. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * As for these characters... Aaron is a major recurring character in the comics and TV show and I don't doubt that there are sources for him out there. Jadis is an important recurring character in the show, but she has been cast for the movies so she should have a greater role there. Alden is a minor recurring character in the show, and is scheduled to be in the upcoming season (starting later this month) so sources may well be out there. Olivia is a minor yet beloved recurring character in the show and comics, so I don't know if there are more sources for her, but she died a few seasons ago so that is one for whom more sources are least likely to be found. I have a lot going on or I would have looked for more sources by now, but if you're inclined to move towards AFD please ping me first and I will find some time this week to do searches in the available sources that I am aware of. BOZ (talk) 12:08, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @BOZ It would be nice if you could try something in the near future. There has been some improvement, but edit source], Alden (The Walking Dead) and Aaron (The Walking Dead) still look very bad. Jadis (The Walking Dead) is the best but still looks worse than most Pokemons we recently merged... Also, User:Citizensmith removed the merge tag from Jadis, so I'll probably go with AfD for that article soon, unless there's something more substantial to prop that page up. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:36, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll see what I can do. It takes some time to go through all the sources and see which ones contain useful info. BOZ (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Put back the merge tag if that's the consensus but the announcement of Jadis return to the franchise with the statement that she is big part of the upcoming CRM/Rick storyline, the multiple third party coverage of this, the fact Jadis appears in two shows within the universe, the fact she was last seen taking off an injured Rick in a CRM helicopter and is now seen as part of the CRM in the trailer, to me anyway, says that the importance of the character has definitely increased since the original merge proposal. There's also the upcoming movies (assuming they actually happen) with Polyanna McIntosh confirmed to have a role in the movies as Jadis/Anne. I did add two additional new references as a start.  Citizensmith (talk) 16:14, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Allright, I just spent whatever time I could coax out of the last couple of hours to dig for what coverage I could find for Jadis. Most of it pertained to her season 7 appearances, though admittedly they could afford to be trimmed down a bit. Hopefully that helps. Since that took quite a bit of time and work I am not eager to look at the other characters, but I will do those eventually if there is a more immediate likelihood of deletion. BOZ (talk) 20:44, 7 September 2021 (UTC)