Talk:List of Girl Meets World characters

Pappy Joe - recurring?

He appears in two parts of the "Girl Meets Texas" trilogy, and no other episodes outside of "Texas". Each of the three parts of "Texas" is counted as an episode, which there is no dispute (I'm hoping, given how some editors treat either multi-part episodes or episodes longer than their usual running time—case in point, the premiere of Henry Danger: Talk:Henry Danger#First episode is one 46 minute special). Normally, two episodes here is enough to qualify a character as recurring, though some TV show articles impose a percentage of the season to qualify (like Pretty Little Liars: Talk:List of Pretty Little Liars characters#4 or 5 episodes = Recurring?). But with Pappy Joe limited to "Girl Meets Texas", whether he were in one, two or all three parts of that, is that really considered recurring?

In the same light, with the two "Girl Meets High School" episodes already aired, there's a temptation right now to add the characters of Thor, Francesca and Nikki (the three seniors), as well as Marly, who all appeared in both episodes, but are they really recurring? MPFitz1968 (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

No. No. No. "Recurring" should be restricted to those that appear in about half-a-dozen episodes or more. Certainly anyone with less than 4 episodes appearances (and I really mean 4+ appearances in aired episodes) should not be listed. I'll get on this... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:06, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll be generous, and leave those with 3 episode appearances (that's Evelyn Rand, Ms. Kossal, etc.). But I'm removing anyone that's only been in two, and that includes Mrs. Svorski. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:09, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Just removed Harper Burgess from the list per this discussion [1]. We need clear discussion on what constitutes recurring, but as far as this discussion goes so far, it look like we need way more than 2 episodes for it to be classified as such. MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

No matter how you slice it, 2 episode guest-appearances should never be categorized as "recurring" – under no reasonable definition does "2 appearances" = "recurring". AFAIAC, we're "bending the rules" to even allow people with only 3 guest-appearances in the "recurring" characters listing – it should really reserved for people with multiple appearances (where "multiple" probably starts at 4–5 appearances). I feel that a discussion on this should be held at WT:TV eventually; but they're about to be distracted with the MOS:TV revisions project, so I don't think holding such a discussion in the immediate near-term would be as fruitful. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

The follow-up question, of course, is whether we should include people in the "Boy Meets World alumni" section that have only appeared in one (e.g. Alan and Amy Matthews, Jack Hunter) or two (e.g. Jennifer Bassett Minkus) episodes. I vote they should also be cut – at the least, they shouldn't get separate subsections of their own and instead can just be mentioned in a quick paragraph blurb that "mentions" appearances from other BMW alumni. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:31, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I personally wouldn't be in favor of cutting any alumni. I've got some suggestions: combining, for example, Alan and Amy Matthews and any others that could be combined; doing two subsections under alumni, the first being "Recurring roles" and the other "Minor roles"; or keep subsections for all true recurring roles, then a final subsection titled "Other alumni" and basically do what you said as a quick blurb that such and such characters have only made one appearance (possibly even mentioning episode and/or season to give more length). --JDC808 ♫ 04:31, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Unnecessary to show seasons for descriptions of Riley and Cory

I'm leaving it alone for now because I am not going to play the other editor's games. However, it is not necessary to indicate the seasons as people watching the series obviously know where they're at. Instead of She and her best friend, Maya Hart, explore middle school (seasons 1-2) and high school (season 3) together (Riley) and He has taken a job as a history teacher at John Quincy Adams Middle School (seasons 1-2) and later Abigail Adams High School (season 3) (Cory), it is sufficient to just have She and her best friend, Maya Hart, explore middle school and high school together (Riley) and He has taken a job as a history teacher at John Quincy Adams Middle School and later Abigail Adams High School (Cory).

Besides, parentheticals are unnecessary and make sentences clunky. Articles should look professional. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

"The other editor's games"? Okay. Also, there is nothing wrong with using parenthesis if they are used sparingly. You will find many "professional" articles that use them. There is a reason parenthesis exist. --JDC808 ♫ 20:07, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

The general reason is for additional info of interest that can be omitted without changing what is being communicated. If the info is necessary and can't be omitted, then it should not be in parenthesis but included directly in the sentence. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:50, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Again, there's nothing wrong with parenthesis. To say it should not be in parenthesis is subjective; it really depends on the situation. In this situation here, both ways work, though with parenthesis actually made it a little more concise. --JDC808 ♫ 05:58, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Again, they make sentences clunky. There's no point in using them where there are other ways to phrase the sentence: commas, em-dahses, different word order, etc. They do nothing but ruin sentences' flow. Amaury (talk | contribs) 06:04, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

They can make sentences clunky or ruin their flow, but it depends on how you use them. --JDC808 ♫ 07:11, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

If it can be generalized to cover the complete series, then seasons are not necessary. Anything that is age change related or does not apply to the whole series needs to be referenced to season or episodes as that is the timeline. That reference should not be parenthetical, though, it should flow in the text when it is important to be there. The article is not just for people who watch the show, it is also for people interested in the series and who may be considering watching it based on info provided on Wikipedia. I think it is unnecessary for this level to care about whether it is middle or high school, possibly describe it as post-elementary covers both and we can avoid clunky season parentheticals. If it matters "John Quincy Adams Middle School (seasons 1-2) and later Abigail Adams High School (season 3)" should be "John Quincy Adams Middle School for the first two seasons and Abigail Adams High School starting in the third season". I still don't see relevance of subject taught though unless that is important to the story. Geraldo Perez (talk) 14:23, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez: How would you recommend changing the sentences if we were to remove the type of schools and the subject being taught?

As for the importance of the subject being taught, I'm not sure how much of the series you've seen, but almost all the episodes that feature the schools—or, more specifically, Cory's classroom—have Cory discussing something that happened back in so and so that relates to what issue his students are dealing with at the time. I'm not sure if that adds any relevance, though.

As for the parentheticals, indeed, indeed. I would prefer em-dashes over those as em-dashes still keep a nice flow, whereas parentheticals make it seem like whispering, I think is how Cyphoidbomb said it once, and he hates them. Amaury (talk | contribs) 14:40, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Spaced N-dashes and unspaced M-dashes are a style issue when used correctly but looks strange to people not familiar with them so may cause some editors and reader distress when encountered. I generally try to avoid uncommon punctuation when possible but that is just my style preference.

If his teaching history is an important component in the story as you mention it should be obvious when reading descriptions that it is important and why, and not just a throw-away adjective modifier to teacher. If I am confused why it matters, other readers will be as well. Given your reasons, should leave in the descriptions that he is a history teacher but I'd like to see some expansion on why that matters as part of the character description. As for change of school, that was a plot point to the start of season 3 going from middle to high school so that probably should remain as it seems relevant. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Amaury essentially said why the subject is important: the history lessons that he teaches relate to Riley and her friend's lives and become life lessons for them. To put it simply, Cory is basically the Mr. Feeny of this show. Also, that's kind of degrading to the profession to call it a "throw-away adjective modifier". --JDC808 ♫ 20:07, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

@JDC808: Teaching is the profession, a teacher of history is not, in general, more important than any other teaching area - it doesn't matter what type of teacher he is. It is important only in the context of this show. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:42, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Credit order

@JDC808: See this part of MOS:TVCAST: "... guest stars will not necessarily be credited in the same order each episode they appear, so their place in the list should be based on the order of credits in the first episode that they appear." – nyuszika7h (talk) 14:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

• That completely contradicts what "order of appearance" means. "Order of appearance" is the order they physically appeared in the show, not the order they were credited. If we go by what MOS:TVCAST says, people reading this article who have seen the series will read "They are listed in order of appearance:" and then get to Shawn and see that they are not, and then people who have not seen the series (or not all of it) would be getting misinformed. So are we gonna go by physical order of appearance, credit order, or an order based on their role in the series? It should be clear to the reader which order the characters are in. --JDC808 ♫ 14:51, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • @JDC808: I didn't notice that was in the article, I even explicitly searched for it. We should go by the credit order as that's what MOS:TVCAST says and it's easier to verify. The text can be changed, though it could be just converted to a hidden note, as most TV series articles don't explicitly state to readers that they are following the MOS order. I'm not entirely against making that visible here, but that should also be added to the recurring section then. nyuszika7h (talk) 15:03, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    • It should be explicit that it is in order of appearance in the credits, that is relatively easy to verify without watching each episode for physical appearance. That is the way starring cast is listed, no reason to treat guest cast differently. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:05, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
      • Agreed. If we list guest stars in the order they appear in the credits when we include them in the episode summaries, then we should do the same for character listings. Amaury (talk | contribs) 16:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Meh. The "order of appearance" guideline for recurring and guest cast is one of those things that sounds logical in theory, but is often less than helpful in practice. Esp. when it comes to recurring characters, it often makes more sense to me to order in terms of "prominence" (i.e. number of appearances) rather than order of appearance. For example, in the 'Recurring' section, it's hard to argue against the idea that Katy, Zay, and Ava will be the characters most people are looking for first, as they appear in the larger number episodes... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I'd be okay with putting them in order based on prominence. Just as an example, Shawn has the most prominent role of the BMW alumni, yet it doesn't seem that way with how far down on the list he is. With the "order of appearance" ordeal, that's the order that was stated when I first started editing this page (although they weren't in that order at the time and I fixed it, although I mistakenly had Harley before Minkus), and that seemed like an easy and logical way to handle it without needing a big discussion on what order to use. --JDC808 ♫ 22:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Double Series Main cast timeline

I feel like there should be a cast timeline for all main characters of both series, either on this page or on a page specifically for both series. They did one for Full House/Fuller House (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Full_House_and_Fuller_House_characters) so I just thought it could work here. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.10.168 (talk) 23:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

This article is "List of Girl Meets World characters". It is not in WP:SCOPE for characters that did not appear in this series to be in this article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:11, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Well then what if we made a page for that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.10.168 (talk) 01:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

It would be a waste of resources to create a page just for a table, and it wouldn't survive, in any case. Amaury (talk | contribs) 01:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Morgan Matthews character description

What I've added addresses the fact that both actresses portrayed Morgan in the episode. It also gives the real world perspective and notes that although there were two Morgans, it was unaddressed why there were two. It was said that the tone was inappropriate. How? It was in line with other character descriptions. Also, the current description is very vague and doesn't really provide anything other than the two portrayed her. This isn't my first time dealing with character pages by the way. --JDC808 ♫ 07:53, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: with your recent revert and warning to my talk page, you seem very WP:OWNish of this page with a comment like "you cannont reinstate your edit". Actually, yes I can if there's good reason. --JDC808 ♫ 07:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

That is not me talking, it's Wikipedia policy, so no, you can't, regardless of the reason. I suggest you stop being disruptive and actually discuss the matter. We do not list quotes from characters here as it is WP:TRIVIA and more appropriate on a wiki like Wikiquote. It is also not inline with guidelines at WP:TONE. Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: You're making a false accusation. None of my edits were disruptive. My edits were actually trying to progress the article, not hold it back. Also, "actually discuss the matter"? That comment is a little late isn't it, considering I started the discussion and haven't edited the article since.

Again, the description I added does not go against TRIVIA or TONE. The small quote is in reference to the fact that there are two actresses portraying the same character on-screen at the exact same time, and Eric was the only character to address that in some way. I had to go back and look, but the current description actually fails to address that they both portrayed her in the episode, let alone at the same time (aside from their names being in parenthesis after the character's name, but that's not enough for someone who hasn't seen this show/episode). If it appeases you, the quote can be removed and reworded accordingly. The rest of the description I added was in reference to the portrayal of the character in the episode, and how the other characters acted (or rather didn't act) in regards to the matter. Something trivial would be like saying Nicksay's Morgan tagged in Ridgeway's while talking to Auggie. --JDC808 ♫ 09:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

For a character description I personally think the addition was a bit excessive with a bit too much in-universe plot, and in-universe from another series not this one, basically for an actress who appeared in only one episode of this series. While connections to Boy Meets World are interesting, that series is not what this article is about. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Geraldo Perez: There was literally one sentence referring to her appearance in Boy Meets World in what I added, and the description had nothing about the plot of the episode, only her (double) appearance and how it was addressed. You said that what I added was "too much in-universe". Have you not read the descriptions for the other characters here? For example, TJ Murphy. That character only appeared in one episode yet he's basically got two paragraphs. --JDC808 ♫ 17:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

The problem isn't so much how many paragraphs there are, the problem is that it was totally inappropriate in accordance with WP:TONE. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: You either have a misunderstanding of TONE, or you just need to reread it. What I added was not inappropriate as you put it. --JDC808 ♫ 18:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I have a perfect understanding of it, and what was there was a direct violation of the guideline. However, as Geraldo Perez says, we're losing focus of what this article is about: Girl Meets World. We shouldn't be putting a lot of focus on Boy Meets World, even though it was the inspiration that created Girl Meets World, and therefore trim down a lot of the descriptions as well as merge those characters from Boy Meets World who had less than three appearance into a general section as IJBall said. Amaury (talk | contribs) 18:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: If you're claiming that what I added was in violation of TONE, then I'm sorry, but you do not have a "perfect understanding of it". As to "losing focus", see my response below to Geraldo Perez. --JDC808 ♫ 18:25, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Keep telling yourself that. Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: Are you going to provide useful input? If you understand TONE so perfectly, why don't you point out exactly how what I added was inappropriate. So far, you have not been helpful, and your recent comment is just another set back. You're saying policies, but failing to cite exactly how what I added was in violation. --JDC808 ♫ 22:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I've already cited what was violated. If you can't or refuse to understand, that's your fault. Amaury (talk | contribs) 00:04, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: Again, you are not being helpful to try and find a consensus. All you said was that the small quote should not be listed because of TRIVIA (which is debatable in itself, but regardless, I agreed to compromise and remove the quote), and that the content was inappropriate per TONE. With that response, you're telling me that you can't actually specify how it's inappropriate per TONE. --JDC808 ♫ 04:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I already specified why. Go and look for what I said because I'm not repeating myself. Amaury (talk | contribs) 04:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: You did not specify how it's inappropriate for TONE. I can link every post and revert you've made in regards to this issue and none would show that you specified how it's inappropriate for TONE. If you have a perfect understanding of TONE, then you can be more specific than "inappropriate". I have asked you two or three times now and you're refusing to do so. --JDC808 ♫ 05:32, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@JDC808: The other descriptions should be reduced as well then too. We seem to be losing focus in this article that it is about Girl Meets World. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Geraldo Perez: I agree that a couple might get too much into their Boy Meets World appearance, but the section is "Boy Meets World alumni". There has to be some description as to what makes them alumni, and if there was something unanswered from BMW that got answered in GMW, that should be mentioned too, like what happened to Mr. Turner. Regardless, what I added was more focused on her appearance in GMW. --JDC808 ♫ 18:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

It's debatable whether Morgan should even be listed here – personally, I'm in the camp that believes that characters seen in only one or two episodes (i.e. pure "guest" appearances) should not be included at "List of [...] characters" articles anyways... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:08, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@IJBall: Agreed. Although as you say, it's debatable, likely because of the ties this series in particular has, and I think that's why it was not "allowed" per se, but not exactly challenged on its being there. Amaury (talk | contribs) 17:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Amaury: I think I've suggested this in the past, but I will suggest it again: any returning BMW character that only appeared in 1–2 episodes should not get their own "section" in this article. Instead, I'd advise starting a section called something like "Other Boy Meets World appearances", and in paragraph form just quickly mention who else appeared (and in which episode they appeared). Basically, all of – Angela Moore, Chet Hunter, TJ Murphy, Jack Hunter, Jennifer Bassett Minkus, and Morgan Matthews (and possibly the Matthews parents and Mr. Turner, though it's more debatable that these should keep their own sections) – should be "desectioned" and cut down to a sentence in a new "Other Boy Meets World appearances" section. (This is one of those things I may do myself, when I have some time to kill. Or I may just never get to it...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I disagree. I would agree if it was a non-notable character/appearance. With these "alumni", they are notable cameo appearances, even if some were only one episode. But that's getting off track from the reason for this discussion. --JDC808 ♫ 17:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Except I'm not saying "don't mention them" – I'm saying that they don't merit separate sections of multiple sentences. Which they don't. And determining whether they do or not is directly relevant to this discussion – if these all get cut down to a quick one-sentence mentions (as they should), then what you want to add will become a moot point. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree that some should be cut down, like TJ Murphy, but I disagree that they need to be cut down so much to not have their own description and just be shoehorned into one paragraph together. The way you described it looks like it would be very choppy in its flow and structure. --JDC808 ♫ 17:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Recent edits

What is actually the problem here? I made valid contributions (tense change and properly linked a character name as per WP:LEAD) and I got reverted because apparently I've been "challenged". Challenged by who and for what reason? What did I actually do wrong here in terms of my contributions (besides revert)? - - JDC808 ♫ 00:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

My issue was that this is the character article for the characters so out-linking a character in the lead who will be described later in the article in the context of this show and not some other one seemed pointless. But that is minor and I wasn't going to fuss much if someone insisted. The other issue I had was repeating the last name of two characters who obviously had the same last names. One mention was sufficient in my mind. Again a minor issue. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

The Cory Matthews article is not just about him in Boy Meets Worlds, it is also about him in Girl Meets World. The GMW description here for him is very short, while his main article expands on his role in GMW (as it should). Yes, the main article is linked under his entry here, but that doesn't mean it should not be linked in the lead. It's not pointless because some readers may not care to go beyond the lead (take a look at the leads for featured character lists, one of which I created and heavily worked on). The last name issue could have been easily resolved, but Amaury made this a bigger deal than it should be when he did a blanket revert (reverting valid tense changes in addition to the issues you had). --JDC808 ♫ 05:00, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

The Cory Matthews article is mostly about his role in some other show that aired a while ago. It does go into some details about his role in this show fairly deep in that article. I though it better to introduce the character primarily as related to this show with the link to further info available in that context. Main reason I didn't like the link in the lead. I'd have been happier with a link directly to Cory Matthews § Girl Meets World if we were to have a link in the lead. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

It can be pipelinked so that it goes to the GMW section there, but it really shouldn't because that wouldn't make sense to an uninformed reader (they would get taken to a section that would assume the reader knew who Cory was prior to GMW). It's the same character regardless if he was in the previous show longer than this one. --JDC808 ♫ 07:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I linked the name via a redirect to the section. It doesn't strictly need to be done this way, of course, but I think it is a better intro in context if the link is clicked by a new reader. Reading the section cold looks sufficient for a character article for this show and more info can be obtained by reading the rest of the article if the reader is interested. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't really agree with it, but I'll compromise. I think you made a redirect page? I fixed that so that it goes directly there without going through a redirect. On a side note, it flows better with "her father" before his name than breaking it off with commas after his name. --JDC808 ♫ 07:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Lucas-Riley relationship at end of series

IP 97.107.216.26 is contending that the two broke up in the series finale and cites the two's talking just outside of Topanga's as evidence that they did. (See their edit summary here.) In viewing that scene, I didn't sense that that was the case and I'm inclined to believe that it would be original research to make any assumption of a breakup. In the scene, Lucas tells Riley that he will tell others that she was his first girlfriend and Riley indicates the same about Lucas, and that she also hoped that Lucas becomes a veterinarian someday. There was no mention from either of a goodbye, so I couldn't see any clear sense of breaking up there. Later, once Topanga said she was staying in New York, the point becomes moot, as one possibility for a breakup (Riley's moving) is ruled out, and there is no further mention one way or the other about the two's relationship status. Even what exists in the article right now - "[Riley] and Lucas become a couple and still are one when the series ends" - is not necessarily accurate and it may be a good idea to reword (or even remove) the sentence to not mention their status. MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:02, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

If it is ambiguous what happened at the end, leave that part out. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Pages should be merged.

Main page: Talk:List of Boy Meets World characters § Girl Meets World characters

To merge List of Boy Meets World characters and List of Girl Meets World characters to make one List of Boy Meets World and Girl Meets World characters page, as with List of Full House and Fuller House characters and the like. 5.100.255.129 (talk) 19:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose Only two main and recurring characters overlap between the two series. This is a spin-off, but there is little in common with the principal casting, characters and setting. This is a different series and should have its own character article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  Note: There are five references on this page, and not good ones at that. If the result of this discussion is not a merge I do think this should be nominated for deletion if sources cannot be found. 5.100.255.129 (talk) 20:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  This article was split from the main article in 2016 due to size and is a supplemental article to the main series article. General reference for character lists is the source material. The information contained in this article will not be better sourced if moved to another article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  Hence why I am reluctantly proposing deletion as an alternative. There either are the sources to justify it or there aren't. 5.100.255.129 (talk) 20:24, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  The list itself needs to be notable, not each entry. See WP:NLIST for more. AfD for this list article will likely result in a keep decision or a merge back to the main article. A delete is unlikely. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose: Per Geraldo. Amaury • 21:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)