Talk:Ryan Malloy

Paternity
While this source does say that the baby is Ryan's, Stacey still slept with a lot of men at that time. How can she be so sure that Ryan is the father? She thinks he is but that doesn't mean he is. It could be any random bloke off the street. Anemone Projectors  00:08, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. Can someone phone up Jeremy Kyle? Qwerta369 (talk) 15:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Lily could even by mine lol Anemone  Projectors  17:19, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Ryan Malloy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100405204021/http://entertainment.stv.tv:80/tv/158783-stacey-brannings-baby-revelation/ to http://entertainment.stv.tv/tv/158783-stacey-brannings-baby-revelation/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110717035929/http://entertainment.stv.tv/tv/165495-ryan-malloy-right-for-janine/ to http://entertainment.stv.tv/tv/165495-ryan-malloy-right-for-janine/

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 15:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Regular (departing)?
I'm not sure this is an appropriate status for Ryan. He's made a couple of brief appearances this year and the storyline seems to have been set up to bring him back for good. With no official confirmation I'm aware of, 'regular (returning)' wouldn't be right either, but 'departing' isn't really correct either as that suggests he's regularly appearing at the moment and soon won't be. Wouldn't 'former, regular' be the most sensible option until any permanent return is confirmed? Smurfmeister (talk) 11:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * They said his return would be brief, which it has been, but I think we're assuming that he will appear again, because we weren't expecting him to appear in his last appearance in the prison. Though to be it seems strange that they would bring him back with this storyline if it wasn't to bring him back full-time. However, we have no evidence that he'll appear again, so perhaps we should say that's it until we hear otherwise. Anemone  Projectors  14:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * McDermott was interviewed in this week's Inside Soap, in the "catch up with" section, where they normally interview former soap stars. In the interview, he says he would take the opportunity of another return as it has been left open, and he says he's happy to have tied up Ryan's story. This implies that that was the end of Ryan's appearances. I think we should put him as a past character. Anemone  Projectors  10:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Classification
I'm just wondering, given that he's made about 3 returns this year, is it worthwhile applying the one year rule? Like we've done with Christian?--5 albert square (talk) 23:19, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Christian's gone a bit weird, in some places he's been marked as already a past character, but we need to apply that rule. I would say yes, Christian, Libby, Jean and now Ryan could all have that rule applied to them. anemone  projectors  10:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Changed. Amended Christian as well 5 albert square (talk) 14:55, 26 November 2016 (UTC)