Talk:Puck (Glee)

Rachel
On the main page, there's a note that says "DO NOT ADD RACHEL" under the significant others portion of the infobox. However, there's no talk page discussion indicating that's the current consensus. I'm removing the note, and starting this discussion here. For the record, I don't see anything wrong with adding Rachel. Dayewalker (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * From the edit history it would seem that the argument against including Rachel is that it was a single episode relationship. However, Manual of Style (television) says "articles should reflect the entire history of a series", so it could be argued that including Rachel is suported by MOS:TV. Rachel Berry only includes Finn and Jesse as significant others, but they were boyfriends in several episodes, unlike Puck. I don't see an issue with including Rachel (it's not hurting anything to include her) but I can see the validity of leaving single episode relationships out. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The original discussion on this subject is here, and there's an ongoing one here. It's not a matter of recentism, but of giving undue weight to very fleeting storylines. Frickative  11:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Beth Corcoran
Is there any real reason why we can't have Corcoran be her last name? I mean, just because they never specifically say it, does not mean it's not true. What else would her last name be? I mean she was adopted by Shelby Corcoran as an infant, so it's obvious that's what it'll be. If that is considered original research, I suggest we just use WP:IGNORE here because it is obviously right. JDDJS (talk) 16:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Quite simply, WP:IGNORE can't be used to get around WP:V. WP:IGNORE only works until somebody challenges something and then you have to provide attribution. --AussieLegend (talk) 17:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Significant others
The article lists Mercedes under Puck's significant others and vice versa, but this article says not to list Rachel as one of Puck's significant others and the Rachel article says the same of Puck despite the fact that Rachel/Puck and Mercedes/Puck were both one-episode relationships. (Frankly, Rachel and Puck's relationship is more significant, as it is revisited a few times, while Mercedes and Puck's relationship is never brought up again.) For consistency's sake, shouldn't either both or neither of Rachel and Mercedes be listed? Ghostofgracekelly (talk) 02:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing that to our attention. Both Santana and Mercedes have been removed from the infobox. HorrorFan121 (talk) 03:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Where did she mention removing Santana? Beggarsbanquet (talk) 00:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Santana/Puck and the need to DISCUSS things before posting warnings against them!
There is no discussion to support the removal of Puck's relationship with Santana, and no reasoning for it cited in the arbitrarily-added "warning" on the page. Before anyone removes Santana again and re-adds the warning, I'd like to know what the reasoning for removing her is, so we can have a proper discussion about it the way we're supposed to on Wikipedia. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 00:00, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, consensus on the Santana page has determined that Santana/Puck count as "significant" and should be listed. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 03:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)