Talk:List of soap opera villains/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about List of soap opera villains. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

The Archers:Brian Aldridge

Unless someone comes up with a credible reference that is a lot more recent than seven years old, I intend removing BA from this list. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 21:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Brian Aldridge

Bringing this here per WP:BRD. The character has a reliable source stating he is a villain, but has been removed because apparently he isn't and the source is not new enough. Personally, I think Brian should be included, especially after some of the things he's done over the years. So he isn't as bad as Matt or Clive and maybe's settled down a bit, but he is still a villain. Here are few more sources: The Archers: The Ambridge Chronicles, The Spectator, The Spectator (HighBeam access required) Daily Post, Western Morning News. - JuneGloom Talk 21:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry June but you are not convincing me. Your first four are too old to matter and the last one merely states, "But if Brian is cast as the villain in the radio soap his business plan has a powerful ally in real life."
I will wait and see. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 23:15, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Gareth. Since the affair with the deceased Siobhan Hathaway, he has done nothing to warrant being described as a villain. Rosemary Cheese (talk) 23:21, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Those sources are not too old. They brand the character a villain. Previous discussions concluded that reliable source states villain - villain gets added to list. Fiction has broad coverage. He may be redeemed today - but he still acted like a villain previously. Plus this smacks POV.Rain the 1 23:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Of course they are too old. And what the hell do you infer by mentioning "POV". Your point of view is the same as June's, whereas Rosemary's point of view is the same as mine. I find your argument unconvincing. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 23:55, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Could someone just point to the policy/guideline/essay where it says a source cannot be used because it's "too old"? I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I would just like to read it myself. FYI, the first source is from a book published last year. - JuneGloom Talk 23:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, published in 2013 and not supporting that he is a "villain" but rather asking the question, "Is Brian Aldridge hero or villain, hard nut, soft touch or unscrupulous cad? ... probably all of the above." Not convincing, is it? — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 00:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes. What is the time scale for source to be deemed too old. The POV issue is clear. You do not view the character as a villain. You want them removed to satisfy your personal view. Sources have been provided. A simple Google search pulls up more. Regardless of JuneGloom's own view she stuck to criteria. Sources branded the character a villain - the villain is added to the list. I see sources so I stick to the agreed criteria.Rain the 1 00:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Nice selective quoting. They go on to add: "With many facets to his character, the answer is probably, all of the above."Rain the 1 00:19, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Not selective at all. Look above! I had included, "... probably all of the above." You are not consistent. I have been reading your posts higher up this Talk page. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 00:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

You cut part of the quote out. Including the whole quote leaves no room for interpretation. Other people may read this rather than check the source directly. Re: personal comment. Keep on topic rather than editors. Now where is that policy/guideline/essay blacklisting sources of a certain age?Rain the 1 00:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

I missed just, "With many facets to his character," — is that mis-leading? — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 00:56, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

My advice: Many sources have been provided. You will need a valid reason to remove this sourced content. If you disagree with the criteria decided upon here. Start a new discussion with the aim of change. All I can offer really. I am sure many other editors would have said the same.Rain the 1 01:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!
So, 'once a "villain", always a "villain",' eh?— | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 12:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

EastEnders villains.

I have made changes to the EastEnders villains sections based on the reliable source which is here:http://www.bbc.co.uk/eastenders/imagegalleries/characters/villains-gallery.shtml. This will take into account changes since the website in 2011 (but there are only a handful of new villains since then). I hope everyone agrees but this is on the only reliable source in regards to villains on the show. Remember a villain is (according to http://www.thefreedictionary.com/villain) 1. A wicked or evil person; a scoundrel. 2. A dramatic or fictional character who is typically at odds with the hero. Having people like Roxy Mitchell is risible. If a source says that someone like Roxy is a villain, then the source is wrong. If the source doesn't even refer to someone as a villain but uses words like 'bad boy' then they are not a villain and should be on the page. If you think someone is a villain, who is not described as a villain, you should give an example of the things that they have done to constitute themselves as one and it should be debated on the 'talk' page. Comprehendo? --AngieWattsFan (talk) 03:24, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

No you have not.Rain the 1 03:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh now you have. I fail to see why you waltzed in and took what would have appeared to be the final say. Wikipedia, team effort, collaboration.. you get the picture. At least people should do. If a source accepted as reliable is tagging these characters as villains then it is fair game IMO. Who are you to say what is okay. I like how you came here with your pet dictionary. No. And as for using bbc.co.uk in your argument. It is the last resort source I would use. As with any official / strongly affiliated website. It is a primary source.. but and we continually look for them other third party sources.Rain the 1 04:08, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I have waltzed in because of your profound lack of competence. I have looked at the sources and some of them do not define these characters as villains at all. If a website said that David Cameron was a fascist and you used it on Wikipedia would that be fair game in your opinion? I am allowed to define what is okay because I am a lifelong viewer of the show and I am using the dictionary definition of the word not using the judgement of someone who does not know what they are talking about. Understood?--AngieWattsFan (talk) 04:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I have. Ian, Lucy and Roxy? Villains? Must be mad!--AngieWattsFan (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Well without thinking too much I recall Ian pulling a very questionable stunt to ensure Mel married him. Lucy was trouble the when MS took the role and... well need I say anymore.Rain the 1 04:08, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

No justification for Roxy. Ian was clearly desperate and lied in the rush of the moment. Kirsty Branning lied that she was pregnant in order to convince Max to stay with her? Lucy was a badly behaved teenager, that's NOT a villain. That is not like bloody Nick Cotton or Stella Crawford or Archie Mitchell! It is an absurd comparison. Lauren Branning run over her father? You are being deliberately obtuse.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 04:13, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Villains come in all shapes and sizes. Some are naughtier than others. Simple concept.Rain the 1 04:48, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

You are being sound like someone who is genuinely obtuse. A villain is not 'naughty', a villain is 'evil'. The reality is that a villain is a villain. Someone who lies in the heat of the moment to try and save his relationship is not a villain, a rebellious teenager is not a villain. Someone who does nothing wrong is not a villain. To compare foolish Billy Mitchell with Archie Mitchell is absolutely absurb.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 05:07, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

This could be very easily resolved by either continuing the discussion, and gaining consensus (which, if you are correct, will be quite easy), or providing your own verifiable, reliable source to support your opinion. Please see WP:NOR for the details. Your wish to be factual is commendable, but you should participate in gaining WP:CONSENSUS to remove cited information. —Josh3580_talk/hist 04:56, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Please keep a civil tone. Personal attacks are unnecessary and can lead to blocking. —Josh3580_talk/hist 05:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Someone who pretends his daughter has cancer. Someone who beats their nephew as a kid. And as for Lucy, rebellious teen Vs person who blackmails, schemes to get pregnant, lies about an abortion, but generally verbally abuses anyone who disagreed with her.. Yeah... We obviously have different definitions of a villain. But thankfully reliable sources are able to point out a clear direction. As others will point out tomorrow. You only want to cause trouble as per.Rain the 1 05:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

He made a lie at the spur of the moment. Using that argument (if you really believe the crap coming out of your mouth), Angie Watts would be a villain and Kirsty would be a villain. Grow up? Lucy was a vulnerable girl at the time and almost everyone verbally abuses someone. You are the trouble maker.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 22:37, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

The fact is that if a reliable source says that a character is a villain, they are included, per the scope of the list ("The following lists soap opera characters who have been described as villainous, evil, bad guys or baddies"). Anything else is original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Also please note that I have been working on removing characters described as "bad boys" per a previous discussion, and targetted EastEnders already because it is the section that has its reliable sources removed most often. So no EastEnders bad-boy characters are included, unless they have also been called villainous, evil, etc. If you think a source is not reliable, then we can discuss each one on an individual basis, but Metro, a national newspaper in the UK, is definitely a reliable source. –anemone projectors– 09:45, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I added this source yesterday. [1] It refers to two new characters which I could ass to the list, Martin Fowler and Minty Peterson. It had been deleted so is it OK to use? I they are not about EastEnders but I also added this source [2] and this one [3] for a character in Emmerdale and this one [4] for a character in Hollyoaks but these were also reverted. In fact all the edits I made yesterday were reverted and I don't understand why as they weren't unconstructive or disruptive. Did I do something wrong?92.232.245.253 (talk) 13:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

So are the above sources OK for me to add? The reason I ask is because the first time I put them on they were reverted and I just want to make sure I haven't done anything wrong before I put them back.92.232.245.253 (talk) 17:28, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in List of soap opera villains

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of List of soap opera villains's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "custardsoapawards":

From Chrissie Watts: "British Television Soap Awards". thecustard.tv. Archived from the original on 2 February 2008. Retrieved 20 April 2009.
From Trevor Morgan (EastEnders): "British Television Soap Awards". thecustard.tv. Archived from the original on 2 February 2008. Retrieved 20 April 2009.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Robbie Roscoe

This source [5] was being used for the Hollyoaks character Robbie Roscoe. However nowhere in the article is Robbie described as "villainous" or "evil" anywhere so it is not a valid source for the character. The article describes Finn O'Connor as evil so the source can be used for him but not Robbie.92.232.245.253 (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

EastEnders Villains 2

This is literally ridiculous. Pauline Fowler is not a villain for lying to Walford about cancer and manipulating her son but Ian is a villain just because he desperately told Mel that Lucy had cancer because he loved her so much and wanted her to stay with him. Martin is a villain for running over Jamie but Lauren ran over her father in cold-blood and ruined a family through adultery. Wicksy and David Wicks were classic adulterers but are not mentioned yet Max Branning is a 'villain'. Roxy Mitchell has done nothing wrong and she is mentioned but Stacey Branning murdered a man and she is not on the list. Joey has done what exactly? If Billy Mitchell is down, maybe Mark Fowler who was a bad child back in the 1980s should also be put down. The whole thing is a ridiculous and needs to change. Also, minor characters like Nora White are NOT really villains because they are not permanent characters. There are plenty of minor characters who were rather nasty people but rightly are not mentioned.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 09:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Permanent or guest character - they are still fictional characters existing in the soap opera genre. If you think a character could be included then find a source to support it and add them to the list. This is a list of characters who have gained notoriety as a "villain" in the media, books and critic reviews. Not scored by their actions in the show.Rain the 1 11:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

AngieWattsFan dont take this the wrong way but I can think of several more people who should go on the EastEnders villains list and also Emmerdale. As RainThe1 said if it is a reliable source then they should be added. I think Frank Butcher should be on the list, adulterer, fire instigator and conman. It is just finding a reliable source. Rupert Smith's EastEnders 20th anniversary book lists Frank as a villain. Also David Wicks I think should be re-added and more suggestions are Jake Moon and Willy Roper and even Ryan Malloy and Stacey Branning and Lauren Branning. Also Natasha Wylde from ED who shot her husband dead. I am glad Charity Sharma has been added, long overdue I think. Others I think classify as villains are Viv Hope from ED, she was a fraudster, adulteress and nasty woman, also Kerry Wyatt. We all have personal opinions on villains but I think the ones I have mentioned deffo qualify if we can find a suitable reference.Benny1982 (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Benny1982. If you have sources backing up these characters you mention referring to them as "villains" then feel free to add them.82.47.191.23 (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Some of the EastEnders characters have been removed from the list again, along with their valid sources.92.232.245.253 (talk) 13:18, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Missing Characters

I notice that the page is now semi-protected, presumably to prevent the vandals from returning, which is good. There are still some characters missing from the EastEnders section these are:

Martin Fowler
Billy Mitchell
Roxy Mitchell
Minty Peterson

Here are the sources for the aforementioned characters some of which are still being used for other characters on the list, Martin and Minty, [6] Billy [7] and Roxy [8].

Joe Macer has also been removed from the list along with the source I added for him. That was this one [9].

The source I added for Home and Away's Kyle Braxton has also been taken down. This is it, calling him "evil" [10].

The British Soap Awards 2014 nominations have been removed as well with this years villain of the year nominees: here it is. [11]

I would add all of them again myself but I can't because of the page being semi-protected so I was wondering if someone else with the authority to edit could help?82.47.191.23 (talk) 11:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

No because Roxy, Minty, Billy and Martin are not villains. It is absolutely idiotic to suggest otherwise.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 22:12, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

That is your personal opinion and these sources state otherwise. This site does not operate on personal opinions and uses valid sources as stated. Some people might be offended to being referred to as idiotic.

Also to clarify a few things:

Billy: Violent, abusive man who beat his nephew up on a regular basis. Certainly was a villain in the past, even if he isn't currently.

Martin: Drug dealer, blackmailer, thief, yob, burglar, vandal.

Minty: Introduced as a thuggish criminal associate of Phil's and a bullying slum landlord. Was a villain to begin with, if not anymore.

At least three of those four are eligible for this list.82.47.191.23 (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

PS AngieWattsfan, removing sources is a blocking offence so if you continue to do it, action might be taken against you. The whole point of the page being semi-protected is to stop people like yourself from vandalizing it and taking things down.82.47.191.23 (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

It is idiotic and that's that. Billy was very briefly violent but became a hero. Good man and therefore cannot be described as a villain. Martin was a rebellious teenager, that does not equate to villainy. Minty was a bad landlord very briefly. It's funny you don't mention Roxy in your comment. I could name Stacey Branning who killed someone, Pauline Fowler who lied to her family about having cancer, Arthur Fowler a thief who went to prison, Dot Branning (then Cotton) was a racist and homophobe, Pat Butcher came as a bad mum (who was also a prostitute and nasty piece of work) who also killed a woman, Lauren Branning ran over her father, Peggy Mitchell plotted to kill a man and Frank Butcher was a criminal. However, we rightly do not mention everyone who has done something bad as a villain, there are certain characteristics that make you a villain for eg. Archie, Den, Nick, Janine, Carl, Trevor not bloody Ian Beale and Joey Branning. Also, I am not vandalizing. The Wikipedia is semi-protected so that people like yourself do not edit. I am an editor.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

My response has been deleted for some reason. I presume you did it AngieWattsFan just because you did not like what I said and it disagreed with your point of view? You are still abusing you privilege as an editor by stopping other people from expressing their points of view. I did not post anything offensive or rude. I tried to be reasonable. More vandalism then.82.47.191.23 (talk) 15:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

AngieWattsFan

There is an editor calling themselves AngieWattsFan who has hi-jacked this page, semi-protecting it to prevent other contributors from adding new characters and sources. They disagree with certain characters being in the EastEnders section of the page and keeps removing characters and their valid sources which is vandalism. They have semi-protected the page so other editors cannot revert the deletions. They don't state facts to back up their argument, just their personal opinions. They are aggressive and confrontational and also insulting, calling me idiotic when I tried to explain why the deleted characters should be on the list. This was a personal attack. They also deleted my response to them which was perfectly reasonable and civil. This person is abusing their editing privileges and breaking all sorts of rules which are explained at the top of the page. They are also preventing other Wikipedia users from contributing to this page by semi-protecting it. They have also been warned about their behaviour on this section of the page before and clearly they haven't learnt their lesson. Can't this person be blocked and prevented from editing permanently?82.47.191.23 (talk) 15:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I hope this member AngieWattsFan also gets banned. This page is based on reliable sources and not personal opinions of a mere viewer. If anything the lists of soap villains should be added to, not removed. I cannot yet find sources but I can think of many who should be on the lists. Is RainThe1 on holiday as he has not commented for over a month and he usually replies to comments quickly plus reiterates that personal opinions should not get in the way of reliable sources. Sorry AngieWattsFan but David Wicks should be re added plus should all the others you keep aggressively removing. You are not the voice of the project and it is wrong to waltz on here removing valid sources and distorting facts to suit your own agenda. I wont be surprised if you do get banned AngieWattsFan for endlessly wreaking havoc and insulting people who disagree with you. I dont yet know how to revert vandalism. Benny1982 (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Error cited?

There also seems to be an error cited at the bottom of the page below all of the sources. I don't know what is causing it. Thought I'd better point it out in case it hadn't been noticed.82.47.191.23 (talk) 14:09, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

EastEnders Nikki Spraggan

I found this [12] article on Metro referring to Nikki Spraggan as a "pantomime villain". It is in the blog section of the paper, which is described as a place for opinions, not necessarily shared by Metro. Can blogs be used as valid sources?82.47.191.23 (talk) 22:12, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Vicky Prior is a professional TV reviewer, so her blog (essentially her column) can be used. –anemone projectors– 21:15, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Just thought I'd better double check.82.47.191.23 (talk) 22:36, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

More EastEnders Vandalism

Someone else has been removing characters from the EastEnders section again. It can't be AngieWattsFan because they have been blocked from editing permanently so it must be somebody else. I have twice reverted their deletions. Is there anyway of blocking any more disruptive editors?82.47.191.23 (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

It seems to have happened again.87.114.17.217 (talk) 22:39, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. –anemone projectors– 08:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome.87.114.17.217 (talk) 17:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Neighbours vandalism

The Neighbours section of the page has been vandalized and some sources have been removed. I don't know how to retrieve them. Some unsourced characters had been added but I have removed them. I was wondering if someone else could retrieve the missing sources.82.47.191.23 (talk) 11:41, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. - JuneGloom Talk 16:07, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Wondering if we go for pending changes protection on this page. –anemone projectors– 16:17, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

That does sound like a good idea. - JuneGloom Talk 19:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

American female villains

I found this recent list of American female soap villains [13]. There were some pop-ups blocked. Is it safe to add this as a source?82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

I've visited that site before to read TV recaps, but I think it's mostly a celebrity gossip site, so I wouldn't consider it reliable. Try searching Google for the characters mentioned first to see if there are any better sources. I know I've added Quinn Fuller to the list already, so I'll try and source the other B&B character. - JuneGloom07 Talk 22:43, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

What about this one for Kristen DiMera? Is this OK? [14]82.47.191.23 (talk) 23:14, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I think this one might be better: [15]. - JuneGloom07 Talk 01:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Is that source definitely OK to use?82.47.191.23 (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, michaelfairmansoaps is fine (it was recommend to me when I started editing The Bold and The Beautiful articles). I don't know too much about inquisitr.com, but there was nothing to say it wasn't reliable at WP:RS/N. You could use both. - JuneGloom07 Talk 02:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I have now added it. I just wanted to double check that it was OK first.82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Emmerdale: Jo Stiles

I found this source for Emmerdale's Jo Stiles. [16] Is it OK to use?82.47.191.23 (talk) 00:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Soaplife Source

I have added a source from Soaplife magazine regarding the Emmerdale character Tracy Shankley. It says there is an error regarding the date section of the source which needs to be checked but I have looked and I can't see any errors, yet it is claiming that there is one and I don't know what I did wrong. Can someone help me?82.47.191.23 (talk) 23:02, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I think it's the dash between the days. Try changing it to an actual – and see if that fixes the problem. - JuneGloom07 Talk 23:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I've changed it. It hasn't made any difference.82.47.191.23 (talk) 13:23, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

It needed an en dash (–), not a small dash (-). I've fixed it now. - JuneGloom07 Talk 15:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I would have done it myself but I wasn't sure how. I think I do know now what key I should have pressed.82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

How do you insert these en dashes whilst typing them, for future reference?82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:38, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

You could just copy and paste a dash already in use (–). I don't know about you, but at the bottom of my editing window (just above the edit summary box) there's a bunch of characters, including the dash, that you just click on and they are added to the page. - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

I've just had a similar problem with an All About Soap source I added and I tried copying and pasting an existing dash but it didn't work. I don't suppose someone could fix it for me as I don't know how.82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

It still hasn't been corrected and I don't know how to do it myself.82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I copied and pasted another existing en dash from another source and it still hasn't made any difference.82.47.191.23 (talk) 14:28, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

You need to add some spaces between the dates and the dash, e.g. 28 March – 10 April 2015. The template doesn't like it when dates from two different months are all together, but it's fine when it's the same month, e.g. 1–7 March 2015. - JuneGloom07 Talk 19:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for that.82.47.191.23 (talk) 14:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Martin Fowler and Minty Peterson

This source [17] for three EastEnders characters was deleted along with the said characters. The page was vandalized but I managed to retrieve the information so no harm was done. I thought I'd better point it out in case the vandals strike again.82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:15, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Why has the source been deleted again? What's wrong with it?82.47.191.23 (talk) 11:59, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Calling someone a "toe-rag" doesn't mean they are a villain. Minty, for example, was much more of a comedic character. Relying on a single opinion-piece as a reference is not very encyclopaedic, so it was removed. That isn't vandalism. Stephenb (Talk) 14:11, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Just before the bit saying "toe-rag", it says quote "When is EastEnders going to make up its mind about how it portrays "villains" followed by a dash before the characters are listed. This indicates or implies that the characters mentioned are villains. Here is the full paragraph:

When is EastEnders going to make up its mind about how it portrays "villains" - the charmless petty criminals, ranging from minor toe-rags like Martin Fowler, Minty and Tariq to major "faces" like Phil Mitchell, Hunter and The Ghost - characters that are basically just thugs, thieves and protection racketeers, but who, half the time, we're expected to care about and even feel sorry for?

The way the sentence is put together effectively is saying that the following characters, i.e. Martin, Minty, Tariq etc. are "villains". Also when Minty first showed up he wasn't a comedy character but a thuggish associate of Phil's who Phil turned to when things were too heavy for him. Minty also bullied Janine Butcher and Laura Beale who he was landlord to, leaning on them heavily for rent money. They mellowed him and turned him into a comedy character when they made Minty a series regular. He was a villain at first, at the time this article was written, even if he wasn't in his later years on the show. The same goes for Martin. He was a villain and a criminal during his teenage years, again at the time this article was written, but isn't anymore as he grew out of it and is a nice character now, but he certainly used to be. The source is also an official one from a newspaper and it fits the criteria for this website because it uses the word "villain".82.47.191.23 (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Firstly, 82.47.191.23, please assume good faith before you accuse people (me, in this case) of vandalism. This edit was not vandalism. The source describes the characters as "petty criminals" and "minor toe-rags", and uses the term "villains" in "quotes" itself, meaning that it's a very weak claim to consider them villains. In fact, this source is actually saying the characters aren't villains at all. –anemone projectors– 21:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was you who had deleted the source. I apologize. The page has been vandalized before which is why I assumed the worst. Secondly, there are other sources on here from the Daily Mirror and other newspaper websites, i.e. The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Daily Star. I used a source from Metro newspaper about Nikki Spraggan that I was told was OK to use. Are all of them going to be deleted as well? How are people supposed to know which sources they can use and which ones they can't? I added one about a character in Neighbours from Inside Soap that was also deleted. Was something wrong with that one? If all the sources have something wrong with them then surely the list will diminish rapidly and surely the whole page should just be deleted as there wouldn't be any point to it if it was so small. It is very confusing if the rules are changed regularly.82.47.191.23 (talk) 16:48, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, it was the only source I could locate which described both Martin and Minty as villains. I can't find any others. Martin certainly fitted in this category once even if it is subjective about Minty. Was this source being sarcastic by calling them as such? Does anyone else have any appropriate sources?82.47.191.23 (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

The other sources shouldn't be removed, it's just that this particular source seems to imply that EastEnders was trying to portray these characters as villains but had failed to do so - therefore not villains. I wouldn't have consdered Martin to be a villain. I wouldn't really consider Nikki one either, but she was called a "pantomime villain". –anemone projectors– 23:29, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Martin was a nasty yob and a trouble maker. He dealt drugs, blackmailed people, burgled, vandalized property, killed a pedestrian whilst driving recklessly, handled stolen goods. He was basically a one-man crime wave so I suppose it could be argued he was one. I agree it is a matter of opinion. It depends what different people would class as a villain and there are different levels of badness. Nikki Spraggan could be described as an antagonistic character who stirred things up, caused trouble for other characters and pursued and seduced a man in a committed relationship, (David Wicks), but I agree she wasn't evil or irredeemably bad either.82.47.191.23 (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

You do have a good point. Some sources are a lot better than others, and in these cases it's unsure whether they are trying to say they're not actually villains. I have found a source calling Martin and Tariq "bad boys", but we decided that a "bad boy" (or "bad girl") isn't a villain and charaters should be described as "villain", "evil", "baddie" or "bad guy". –anemone projectors– 13:38, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree. It makes things simpler having a starting point and narrowing it down to two main categories, "villain" or "evil" or both. I added the source for Martin and Minty because I thought it was definitely calling them villains. I wouldn't have done so otherwise. The article writer for the Mirror should have made it more clear.82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:45, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I agreed with the addition for a long time, but recently I've re-read it and come up with a different conclusion. When I say "EastEnders villain", I think of Nick Cotton, Phil Mitchell, Archie Mitchell, Janine Butcher, Michael Moon, Yusef Khan, Derek Branning, Lucas Johnson, Tony King, Carl White, May Wright, Stella Crawford, Steve Owen, Trevor Morgan and the likes. But I don't really think of Martin Fowler, Nikki Spraggan, Ian Beale, Babe Smith, Stan Carter, or even Ben Mitchell, though I know some of them have turned "evil" in their time. But this is a list of characters that have been described somewhere, by someone, as "villain", "evil", "baddie" or "bad guy". So maybe Martin and Minty should still be there. I'm confused now! –anemone projectors– 21:26, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

If it helps, I did read in an earlier talk section that this list didn't record characters based on their actions in the show but by what they were referred to by official sources so a character referred to as a villain was allowed to be added even if we or the viewers didn't think they were particularly bad or evil. If a better source comes along for Martin or Minty then it would be OK to put them on. As I said above, the only reason I added that source was because I thought it was definitely calling those characters villains.82.47.191.23 (talk) 00:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

This article from the Daily Mirror refers to Sinead O'Connor from Hollyoaks as having an "evil streak". [18] It is not on the main page but on the picture caption section. Would this one acceptable to use?82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:39, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

I've added the Neighbours one back, as I have the magazine and can also verify that it does describe the character as evil. - JuneGloom07 Talk 21:39, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Just wanted to double check if it was all right.82.47.191.23 (talk) 20:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Is the Hollyoaks one all right to use?82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:45, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

This article is from the Daily Mirror. [19] It is mainly about Simon Barlow and Bobby Beale but it mentions some other characters further down the page including Martin Fowler and Bethany Platt. Is this source acceptable to use for them or just for Bobby and Simon?82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Just thought I'd note that I've changed the heading of this section because it's not about vandalism. As for this source, it says "Even little Martin Fowler raised a little bit of trouble on the Square but this [Bobby Beale and Simon Barlow] is a whole new level of violence." The article is about villains, and I think they are indeed saying that he (in his teenage years) is a minor villain. Though it doesn't explicitely say "Martin Fowler is a baddie" or anything along those lines, it's a better source than the last one, though I still think it's quite weak. What do others think? Is this source ok? –anemone projectors– 08:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

You were right to do so. I was thinking of changing it myself. I only typed it because I honestly thought the page was being vandalized. I presume for the Mirror source, the same applies for Bethany.82.47.191.23 (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd say for Bethany, it's a stronger source than for Martin, but still not explicitely calling her a villain, evil, or bad. –anemone projectors– 14:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Also in a recent interview, published on Digital Spy and in Inside Soap, Lucy Fallon who plays Bethany is actually quoted as saying that Bethany "isn't a villain". So the question is which source do we believe or agree with. It can be very hard to decide.82.47.191.23 (talk) 12:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I've added it just for Simon and Bobby, not the others.82.47.191.23 (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Just back briefly to repeat myself: "Relying on a single opinion-piece as a reference is not very encyclopaedic"... The bit about 'single opinion-piece' is important. Single opinions are not a reliable source, AFAIK. The character may only be villainous for a short period, or the opinion-giver may be on their own. Do we have any sources that say it is the intention of the programme, actor or production team to portray a particular character as a villain, or is there an overwhelming consensus of opinion that it is so? If not, characters like Minty or Martin should definitely not appear on the list. Stephenb (Talk) 15:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very helpful. Put like that, it's probably not right to include Martin or Minty, or some others. How about Nikki Spraggan, actually called a villain, but only in an opinion piece? There must be others too. But I think it's ok if they're only a villain for a short while, if it's defining of that character, as characters change all the time, some start out as villains but change, others become villains later on. –anemone projectors– 18:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

How are we supposed to know which sources are single opinion pieces when we add them though? It might not always be obvious.82.47.191.23 (talk) 11:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, Stephenb. Surely a character's villainy isn't about length of time. I believed this list was recording soap villains past and present, including ones who aren't villains anymore. I agree with anemoneprojectors. There are also ones who weren't villains before but added because they later became ones. It becomes confusing if the rules are updated constantly and there is not one fixed template for everyone to follow.82.47.191.23 (talk) 12:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I didn't claim it was soley about "length of time". I suggested we should rely on reliable sources, rather than opinion pieces. I see AP has restored Sharon based on the sub-title of an article where Sharon isn't definitely identified as the villain of that subtitle (it could mean Grant in that quote). We could add almost anyone in EastEnders as most have been bad and/or villainous at some point. Even Tamwar. And there are probably opinion pieces for them,somewhere. I could write one! But that doesn't make them soap opera villains. I'll repeat: single opinion pieces or reviews are not reliable sources that these are soap opera villains: for that, I believe you must have sources that provide intention and/or consensus. Stephenb (Talk) 19:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

The source for Sharon came from Inside Soap magazine. The page was all about Sharon so I added the source because I assumed that the quote was referring to Sharon as the page was about Sharon and her character history. Grant Mitchell is mentioned in passing on the page as he was married to Sharon but I thought it was more than obvious that the quote was referring to Sharon as the whole page was about her and not Grant, which was why I added it.82.47.191.23 (talk) 21:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree with you about EastEnders characters. So many of them are morally bankrupt it is hard to tell who is good and who is bad. That's why I believed this list was only referring to ones who were definitely referred to in writing as being "villains" which narrowed it down. Tamwar Masood, for example, has never been referred to as a villain in written sources even if he has acted as such onscreen, which is why he is not on here. As I explained earlier, the only reason I added the source about Martin and Minty was because I thought the article was definitely calling them villains.82.47.191.23 (talk) 21:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I found this source for Hollyoaks Kim Butterfield [20]. Is it OK to add?82.47.191.23 (talk) 12:04, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I also found this one about EastEnders' Claudette Hubbard. [21] It features a quote by Richard Blackwood who plays Claudette's son Vincent saying that Vincent "gets his villainy from his mother". Is that insinuating that Claudette is a villain too?82.47.191.23 (talk) 13:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

If so, is it a valid source to use?82.47.191.23 (talk) 21:41, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

I'd prefer a source saying "Claudette is a villain", or "evil Claudette", or something along those lines, as there's no dispute there at all. the same with the Hollyoaks one. –anemone projectors– 10:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

OK I won't use it then. Just wanted to be sure.82.47.191.23 (talk) 15:21, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Aaron Livesy

This source from the Sun [22], about Emmerdale's Aaron Livesy was deleted. Was there something wrong with it? If not would it be OK for me to put it back?82.47.191.23 (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Also the date is not visible on the page so I cannot put it after adding the source. It was published in November 2008 but I do not know the exact day.82.47.191.23 (talk) 16:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The reference was already in the article, at the list at the bottom but not attached to a name. It was published 22 November 2008. I've sorted it all. –anemone projectors– 21:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I would have done it myself if I'd known how.82.47.191.23 (talk) 23:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Gordon Livesy, Emmerdale

I added this source [23] for Gordon Livesy, Aaron's dad in Emmerdale but it was deleted. What was wrong with it? It says he is "evil" so I thought it fitted the criteria so what was the issue?82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:14, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with it. I removed a different source from the article because it didn't describe the character as evil, but called his behaviour evil. When I saw others removing this after me, I simply assumed it was the same source. This new source should be allowed because it calls the character "evil Gordon Livesy". Anemone Projectors 14:44, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

OK. Just wanted to check and yes it is a different source to the other one.82.47.191.23 (talk) 19:24, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Abi Branning and Babe Smith

On the source: http://metro.co.uk/2016/02/15/eastenders-heres-why-aunt-babe-and-abi-branning-are-the-best-soap-double-act-ever-5684238/ would they be considered villains if the article said "Babe and Abi are capable of some monstrous deeds as a villainous double act."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BladerPharmist (talk • contribs) 21:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, I think no because it doesn't mean "Babe and Abi are are a villainous double act". But it doesn't really matter anyway as both are already listed. Anemone Projectors 23:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Sharon Watts

Why has Sharon Watts been removed from the list? There was a source in Inside Soap which referred to her as a villain. Was there something wrong with it?82.47.191.23 (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

The "Victim and Villain" source talks about Sharon being a victim, while Den, Grant and Phil are the villains in her life, which is why I removed it here. Anemone Projectors 22:09, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Does it? I thought the source was saying that Sharon was both a "villain" and a "victim" in different storylines. It didn't seem to be specifically saying that Den, Grant and Phil were "villains". The page was about the character of Sharon so I thought it was more than obvious that Sharon was who the paragraph was referring to. Was I wrong?82.47.191.23 (talk) 11:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The quote that was added in the reference said "Victim and Villain: Sharon was shattered to discover that her beloved dad was the father of her best friend Michelle's daughter. After teen romances with Ian Beale and Simon Wicks she married ex-paratrooper Grant Mitchell-but Grant turned abusive when Sharon refused to have kids. Sharon found comfort in the arms of Grant's (slightly) more kindly brother, Phil...". That's clear that they're calling her the victim - Den slept with her best friend, Grant was abusive towards her. I don't have the actual article to had at the moment but I'm sure I double checked it before I removed her from the list to make sure I was right to do so. Anemone Projectors 22:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I thought the "victim and villain" quote was in reference to Sharon herself, calling her both. It didn't appear that it was saying she was the "victim" and Den/Grant etc were the "villains". I assumed it meant she was the "villain" in the affair storyline with Phil. I may be mistaken but that was what I believed at the time and how it appeared and that was why I added the source. If it doesn't fit the criteria on here then fair enough, you were right to remove it. I apologize for adding an incorrect source.82.47.191.23 (talk) 00:24, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

It's no problem, we just interpreted it differently. Even if I'm wrong and you're right, and it does mean that Sharon is the villain in that case, I think there's enough doubt for us to not include it. Anemone Projectors 09:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Fair Enough. If there is reasonable doubt then its better to play it safe.82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:06, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Home and Away characters

Two of the Home and Away characters have been removed from their section: Jazz Curtis and Amanda Vale. Was there a reason for this? It may be misconstrued as vandalism, otherwise.82.47.191.23 (talk) 11:54, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

No, not vandalism. Check the edit history. Again, I removed the two characters here because, as I said at the time, "in this ref, only the males are called 'villains', the females are called 'sultry sinners' and 'feisty females'. The article is about male villains." A source would have to be found calling them villainous, evil or bad. Anemone Projectors 22:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I see now. Fair Enough. The link to the page has gone so I couldn't look at it but in this case you were right. The article is still being used for Eve Jacobsen though. Does it refer to her as a villain? There is another source being used for Eve which again, the link has gone but is entitled "Home and Away" and from "Whats On TV" magazine. Did that one call her a villain? Is there any way of checking?82.47.191.23 (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I'll look into this for you. Anemone Projectors 09:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

The channel 5 source has been archived, and doesn't mention Eve but does mention Zoe - is this the same character? Should be removed regardless. Also, the What's on TV reference already has a link to an archive which says "The notorious 'Summer Bay Stalker' Zoe McCallister, who terrorised the community before being exposed as ex-psychiatric nurse Eve Jacobson, was particularly tenacious and returned to the bay three times until being killed in a gas explosion." It describes what she did but doesn't call her a villain. I think we might need to check our sources to make sure it's the characters being called villains or evil or bad, and not just their actions or storylines. Anemone Projectors 11:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Actually they do call Eve a villain. It says "Home and Away has never been short of troublemakers, rebellious teenagers and true villains" and then talks about Johnny Cooper before moving on to Zoe/Eve. Anemone Projectors 11:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Zoe McAllister and Eve Jacobsen are the same character. Zoe was the identity Eve used whilst committing her crimes. So if Zoe is referred to as a villain, they mean Eve as she murdered the real Zoe.82.47.191.23 (talk) 18:08, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on List of soap opera villains. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Claudette Hubbard (EastEnders)

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz-tv/hot-tv/500321/eastenders-live-blog-drama-and-gossip-albert-square Can anyone verify this for me please? This article describes how Claudette can survive whatever is thrown at her (being stangled or falling down the stairs) and to "never underestimate the power of a super villain" which would refer to her. I don't think this refers to Vincent because that would make no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BladerPharmist (talk • contribs) 21:06, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I think that article is definitely referring to Claudette.82.47.191.23 (talk) 17:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

So should we consider adding her yet? I think this is strong enough evidence (especially because was referring to her and no one else). BladerPharmist (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

@BladerPharmist: Yes this source is good :) Anemone Projectors 13:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Home and Away, Angelo Rosetta

The source for Angelo Rosetta that has been added to the page-Is it a valid or reliable one? Does this list allow for characters that are described as "baddies" as well as "villains" or "evil" because there may be others than can be added otherwise as a result of this definition.82.47.191.23 (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, we allow "baddies" and "bad guys", but not "bad boys" or "bad girls". Anemone Projectors 13:00, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Is the website it is from OK to use?82.47.191.23 (talk) 15:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh good point. TV.com appears to contain user-generated content, so it would not be a reliable source. Thanks for checking. Anemone Projectors 12:55, 16 March 2016 (UTC)