Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soap Operas

Soap Operas WikiProject
Project navigation links
Main project page	talk
Tasks
Participants
Templates
Assessment
→ Unassessed articles
→ Statistics
Useful links
Style guidelines

Collaborative improvements and discussion

With the recent surge in AfDs, PRODs, merges and general scrutiny on soap articles, I believe it's time we took collaborative action on the state of articles. Whether we like it or not, many of the soaps' early articles are in a bad way and we have all ignored it for too long (myself included, no blame here). I'd like to propose a project where the community improve an article (or a small few) each week so that we can get the standards up. I could potentially make a table with info for when we would improve each article, beginning with Hollyoaks listicles and gradually moving on to Hollyoaks character articles, and then other soaps afterwards.

I would only wanna set this up if there are editors that will actually do it with me. I don't expect undying loyalty where you sign your name up and are expected to improve the entire face of the project, but I'd hope for some form of dedication to the project, as we all care about the soaps and want to improve the site. You don't have to edit every soap either, if you only watch certain ones, feel free to dip in and out. Pinging soap editors to see if anyone is interested in joining / suggesting anything. JuneGloom07, Soaper1234, Raintheone, AnemoneProjectors, Livelikemusic, Conquistador2k6, TAnthony, Adavid299, Connorguy99, Yoshi876, Andyplymouth, DaniloDaysOfOurLives. Aaaaand anyone else that sees this! – Meena • 17:52, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I know we have been discussing this privately so maybe it might be a bit redundant to reply but I 100% agree. The recent PRODs and deletions etc have been extremely saddening to myself and I assume to much of the soaps community. I have been trying these past few months to source more articles and add reception and more real life information to the lists and articles in order to improve them and I will continue doing so, especially with the early yearly/decades lists (my main focus was on The Bold and Beautiful lists as they needed more work but now I will also shift to Hollyoaks early lists too). I already have begun trying to improve List of Hollyoaks characters (1997). I also wanted to note that it would be extremely appreciate if editors who have physical sources (mostly "Inside Soap") could help as well, as they have a lot of information about earlier characters too, so please do help! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 18:44, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Hollyoaks is the only soap that I do watch, I'm more than happy to help out where I can, I began watching in 2013, so things before then are a little alien to me. Table would be really good to have set up to see what needs to be done. I can't pledge to be the most active person, but I'm will to help out where I can. Yoshi876 (talk) 22:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Hiya, agree with both of you that there’s been a spate of deletions of late; not sure if something has prompted it but it’s frustrating, especially when information is accurate but just has issues with sourcing. Sourcing is something I’m fairly obsessive about and whilst I don’t have physical sources am reasonably good at tracking stuff down if it’s out there somewhere.

I currently watch EastEnders, Emmerdale and Hollyoaks, which is the latest soap I started watching in 2016. I’m a literally never miss an episode person. Andyplymouth (talk) 22:41, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives, Yoshi876, and Andyplymouth: Amazing that we already have the support of 4 editors incl. myself! I'll draw up a table later and take article length into consideration when allocating. Thinking 1-3 articles each week. The table will be located on a subpage but I'm gonna display it on this talk page and the main WP:SOAPS page too. – Meena • 09:50, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan! I’ve not done ‘organised’ editing before, tend to just update stuff if and when I notice it so can I ask is this just be a case of focusing on what’s current on that table or do I need (or more accurately would it be helpful) to do anything else? Andyplymouth (talk) 01:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Although I wasn't pinged and probably would only be able to help with Neighbours articles, I'm in. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 10:33, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Therealscorp1an, hi, I've seen your comments in a fair few discussions but don't think we've ever really interacted as I don't watch the Aus soaps. But would love to have you on-board! – Meena • 10:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

All good! I'd love to be off assistance where possible. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 23:34, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Update I have made a table of articles to be improved on what weeks. See: Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas/Improvement drive. – Meena • 11:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I will help but it does seem like a drive to improve Hollyoaks articles. I think there are other articles that need attention first. Characters put forward for improvement such as Darren, Cindy and Nancy hardly need saving from the brink of deletion. Sure, they need updating but so does nearly every character. Characters such as Jodie Nash and Scott Anderson could have been worked on rather than merged. The 1997 character list is up for deletion yet no one has done anything to improve it. Who is adding sources today? Lets go crazy and churn out edits..Rain the 1 10:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

The articles I've put forward to begin with are all Hollyoaks as these are what are being targeted at present. I did it in chronological order (the same with characters such as Darren, Cindy and Nancy, I just went in order of Template:Hollyoaks characters). Do you think it would be better to focus on a variety of soap articles at the same time? I want others' input as this is a collaborative effort. – Meena • 14:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Sol Patrick was another good example. Offed the article to save a list. You could have included the information from that article in a short blurb and then expanded Sol's article. I think everyone has rolled over too easy is the face of deletionists. If there is an AFD we should put in the work to improve the article rather than wash our hands of it. I understand that Hollyoaks is very much the current focus of this collective effort to purge and delete. So expanding the scope is probably a discussion for another day.Rain the 1 17:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I will try to help where I can. I do think it is worth expanding this beyond just Hollyoaks articles as there are plenty of articles that could do with saving across the board, but perhaps just later once the Hollyoaks targeting has ceased. Also, it is worth noting that some of these lists do not need work at all. I spent a lot of time working on List of Hollyoaks characters (2019) a while ago, and would argue it doesn't need much - if any - work. And like Raintheone has mentioned, some others are hardly on the brink of deletion, where others could do with adding to rather than merging instantly. Soaper1234 - talk 19:30, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

I'll help where I can but Hollyoaks, let's be honest it isn't my show (You're more likely to see me under the hood with Nabes, H&A, Corrie, ED and Enders articles, in addition to helping Rain housekeep Brookside). I'm willing to fill in gaps with sources and that from whatever I can find now and then--Conquistador2k6 (talk) 17:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Helen Cunningham

Hey all, Helen Cunningham has recently been nominated for deletion. I wanted to ask if anyone has any physical sources (e.g. Inside Soap) to improve her article? Meena has help a lot already, I have tried finding some sources but all the ones I found online were already in the article, so if anyone could help, it would be greatly appreciated. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 01:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Oh not another one! I will get searching for those sources over the next few days.Rain the 1 21:03, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Neighbours time jump

NEIGHBOURS SPOILERS FOLLOW!

In the new series of Neighbours, there has been a two year time jump, meaning the current year in the "Neighboursverse" is 2024. In the first episode of the renewal, Terese Willis married Toadie Rebecchi (in an unexplainable twist I might add!). In the infobox in their articles, should under their husband/wife parameter read "[Name] (2023–present)" or "[Name] (2024–present)". The first option reflects the real world (production and release), but the second option reflects when these events occurred as per the serial in which the time jump plays a massive role in this reprisal. I'll just ping a few users and of course anyone else who wants to comment can. Thanks! JuneGloom07, Soaper1234, Raintheone, AnemoneProjectors, Conquistador2k6, TAnthony, DaniloDaysOfOurLives and Meena. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 13:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Hey! As far as I am aware soaps usually use real world dates (e.g. based on the date the episode was released in rather then when it was set). Days of Our Lives did a time jump in 2019 and we had the same issue and we stuck to the real world one (especially as technically dates don't necessarily allign with the real world 100%). A note can always be added next to the years explaining the time jump and that it is set in 2024. Hope this helps! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:03, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I believe that dates in the infobox should refer to the real world, otherwise it would be confusing to any casual reader of a wiki page, for example, to show a marriage ending in a year that hasn't arrived yet. Are references made to the year being 2024? If not, I would suggest it is still set in the present day but that time has just moved forward by two years. — 🌼📽️AnemoneProjectors💬 22:10, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Yep. What's weird is that it seems Neighbours episodes are currently referring to the world as 2023 as per the title on Terese's meeting folder. Typical soap opera! - Therealscorp1an (talk) 22:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Zak Ramsey for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Zak Ramsey is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zak Ramsey until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

(Oinkers42) (talk) 15:24, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

List of recurring Neighbours characters

If you haven't seen already, this article is up for deletion. At the moment, it seems like the consensus will end up being in favour of merging it, but I just want to alert editors here in case anyone wants to comment. By deleting this article, which is very developed as compared other recurring character lists I might add, what does it mean for other recurring character lists? Does this set a precedent to delete them all? If we merge List of recurring Neighbours characters into List of Neighbours characters, then that article will essentially just be overrun by a list of recurring characters. Isn't that article meant to be for currently appearing characters? I just wanted to point these out and alert editors, so all soap editors can understand the implications of deleting/merging this article. Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 22:10, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Article images

Alright. Following this discussion, concurrent with this discussion, both regarding literally the exact same topic, I think it is about time we move this to the Project so it can be open for all editors.

There has been a disagreement regarding the recent changes to the photos featured in the infoboxes of many Neighbours characters' articles, such as David Tanaka, Aaron Brennan, Paul Robinson, Terese Willis and Melanie Pearson, made by User:Livelikemusic. Some of these changes have been reverted by editors like myself and User:Raintheone, but some have since been re-reverted by User:Livelikemusic.

User:Livelikemusic argues that these changes, and I quote directly from this edit, "The change was to provide a higher quality image, yet still meeting non-free content criteria requirements". However, some editors, including myself, disagree that the new photos serve any real constructive "high quality".

The arguments spurted include that these new photos are quite rectangular rather than the typical square shape meaning that they expose unnecessary neck and body that detract from the article, some of the positions captured appear to be "humorous", the new photos barely display better quality in comparison to the old photos, and the updates of some images do not represent the character over their entire tenure, such as Aaron, who has only recently appeared with a beard over the past two weeks, and whose photo now displays him with a beard rather than beardless which he has been over the past eight years. Another argument is that the new photos show no change in appearance, like for David, and therefore have no need to be updated.

I have xt'd the arguments so it is easier for editors to pinpoint them in that paragraph.

The point of Wikipedia is to edit collaboratively and I really dislike arguing because it's not constructive, so other editors, please tell us your opinions on the matter so it can be resolved.

Kind regards, and with sorry for the length of this post, - Therealscorp1an (talk) 07:11, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Perdita Hyde-Sinclair for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Perdita Hyde-Sinclair is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perdita Hyde-Sinclair until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

(Oinkers42) (talk) 06:21, 13 December 2023 (UTC)