User talk:Jtomlin1uk

Archive 1

Apologies
Hi there, just saying sorry for not doing much lately. Hopefully I should get more done this week! David 11:36, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Calendar date pages
Thanks for helping out with these. David 16:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Categories
Oh, the places category definitely needs tidying up, fortunatley not much has been done with it yet. The 13 Coronation Street page seemed good at the time, but I think it would be better if rather than mainly being an overview of the history of the house, the section on the families who have lived there was reduced and there was more emphasis on the features of the house, which in the case of No.13 would be things like the serving hatch and mural, which could bring in that other article. I'll delete those other pages you asked for, and as for the celebrity category.... hmmm, weird one. Not sure what to do there to tell the truth! David 16:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Good idea about archiving your page, I might do the same to mine. David 16:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Mural
Thanks for the spelling correction on article of the week :) I was just gonna reverse the changes to your mural page (they seem to have missed the point of your quotation marks!), but now your here I shall leave you to do it yourself if you like :) I've gotta disappear for a few minutes anyway...TellyFan 23:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps it was a flying visit - I'll do it myself :)--TellyFan 23:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes
Hi John

1) I'm not sure what you mean, are you suggesting we note down when episodes are repeated on ITV2 and when the omnibus's (omnibi?) are on? I suppose that's relevant, but another way to note the same information but in a more condensed way would be to create pages on Granada Plus or Omnibus and give details of the broadcasting patterns there, without long lists. Special repeats are more of note than regular repeats, which strike me as a detail too far.

2) Done. It had 90 sections!

3) Article of the week is now changed to Featured Article, and the sidebar is also changed (what do you think of it? I think its much improved). I'll work on the main page this week, hopefully (I know I say that a lot!).

4) Done. Corrie.net is apparently full of errors.

5) Thats that done, too, although the orange looks a bit like the character articles infoboxes (which I'm still not happy with). I'll be buying Pardon the Expression on DVD so although it might not be considered a priority the articles on that programme can be expanded. It might be unwise to buy something on DVD I've never seen but I did the same with Classic Coronation Street, and indeed Classic Doctor Who!

David 21:49, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, it's me again. The infobox template for The Brothers McGregor I quite like actually, the colours seem to work better together than the ones on the character template, so if anything gets changed it'll be the characters one! David 11:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi John, you might like to look at my replies on your five points on Davids' page. Your ears should be burning anyway :p

In fact I suggest you do that before you read the rest of this :)

Ready? :D

1) I may as well let you know about those special repeats. They were shown on two afternoons around the time of Mikes' death. The first would have been Episode 2284, and the other was the death of Alma. Those naughty people at ITV replaced the original end credits with that awful blue mist thing they were doing at the time, with the theme tune shortened accordingly. If you think you can find the times/dates easily be my guest :)

2) You could have said earlier that you were having trouble writing on David's page! :p

3) How kind to say my idea was excellent :)

4) Err... is there a golf ball coming??

5) I'll have a bit of info on the most watched episode of the Brothers McGregor. I don't have the info to hand, but I checked earlier (I'd been reading what had been said on my mobile) and its definitely in my "Televisions Greatest Hits" book (as used in my earliest contributions to Corriepedia!) Hopefully that will beef one episode up a little bit. As for Graeme's article, tut tut ;) I s'pose I'd better do it then :)

TellyFan 01:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Restricing access
Restricting access to all unregistered users goes against the grain somewhat. I don't even know if it's possible to do so, so I'll ask for help from the Wikia administrators. David 10:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

A couple of things
There I was being embaressed at spelling Antony Cotton incorrectly and not noticing an unlikely red link (I was at least pleased to see (according to IMDb) that the professional get it wrong sometimes, too), only to find you've been calling Brooke Vincent 'Brook' today! :p Mind you we're both guilty of leaving Brooke's article with English still on it! Or any mention of taking over from someone else! David can't get the staff, can he? :)

With regards the special repeats, there is, as they say more than way of skinning a cat. I thought I remembered at the time of the repeat someone saying how odd it looked seeing names like Albert Tatlock on modern-style credits. Well I thought I did. Perhaps I'd looked elsewhere but I did find this forum thread confriming the date/time of that repeat: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=364118. Alma's death was the next day at the same time but incase you're interested here is the thread for that, too: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=364516

Oh and I don't think it was the blue mist credits either, wasn't this the era of the equally fetching blue stripes?

Over an out for the mo! TellyFan 17:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Cast lists
Great! I wouldn't have thought we'd get a year complete with cast lists from the 1960s. A pity about 1961. David 13:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Lowe repeat?
Hi John, how was your break away? I was in Portsmouth on Saturday and spotted an Arthur Lowe biography by Graham Lord. I hoped it might solve the apparaent mystery of the tribute Corrie repeat. Are you absoultely sure there was one, though? The only repeat he mentions for ITV was "Car Along the Pass" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0585687/

By the way, as a fan of vintage Corrie, I'd strongly recommend you catch-up on Fridays and especially Monday's episodes. With Ken thinking of leaving the street he's lived on all his life, there were some quite good scenes, with Annie Walker even getting a mention or two! TellyFan 15:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Lady Lawson Loses images
I've taken the pictures, do you want them cropped at all? David 09:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, do you want the curtain call image to be with or without Swindley? David 09:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. They're in the upload log. David 10:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi there John, great work on the article but (I hate saying this) remember that the content of an in-universe article should be separate from any out-of-universe behind the scenes information, which preferably should be under its own heading within the article. Also, about the Christmas category, I was thinking about changing that to Christmas episodes, and moving Lady Lawson Loses to a new category (something like Plays or Theatre) within the Culture category. I hope I don't sound cheeky! David 10:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't like the article split to be honest, the TV Times competition article is really about the background of the Lady Lawson Loses performance in the show and I think still belongs in that article, but in a separate section, it would also beef up the existing in-universe article which currently has 2 pictures, which is probably one too many for such a small article.


 * As regards to the category, I think a Christmas category could be relevant, if it contains a subcategory for Christmas episodes (the article on Christmas itself could go on the Christmas category, along with the Lady Lawson Loses article probably).


 * Publicity is a good suggestion for a category, not sure where it should go though, perhaps the main Coronation Street category. For the rest, I think we should make use of the categories that are there already - the Culture category was designed as a catch-all category for anything in the show that isn't a person or a place. Perhaps Events or Celebrations as a subcategory there? That would take care of the Real Life Events. The Individuals connected with Coronation Street is also a good idea but if these people didn't have a credited role then the information on them thats relevant to Corrie might be better on a different article. Emphemera would be a good category to put in the 'in-universe articles' category. I'll let you reply before I make the new categories. David 15:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

A favour
Hi John, I'm on my way out so I won't have time but if you're online today would you mind creating a template for the front page for 23 May? Yesterday's one is still up, and I've created the 23rd May article and was planning to make the 'on this day' template about the trip to Woburn Alley, I've uploaded a picture of Ena meeting the Duke of Bedford (can be found in the upload log). If you don't have time, don't worry about it, I doubt we'll have many visitors today anyway. David 12:03, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yep, I took the picture but forgot to upload it (doh!). I'll update it now, for the remaining hour and a half of the day! David 21:22, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Redirect deleted, infobox created.

One thing to ask about - for today's "On this day" there aren't really any major events in the episodes for 28th May so I was thinking about making it about the 1990 telethon that featured an appearance by Hilda Ogden, which according to the Christmas 1987 episode was broadcast on the 28th May. Trouble is, I don't know anything about it, can you help? David 11:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Cast lists
You're right, I'll put them back in. David 21:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I'll get those screenshots to you shortly. Agree about the writer and director pages, fortunately the episode tables on the year pages should make finding their episodes a simple task. David 08:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thats them uploaded, under Terry_Bradshaw and DJ_1979. David 09:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi John, thank you for making me feel welcome and appreciated. I'm really new to Wikis as a whole but picking up things as I go along. Spelling and grammar are my forte - so will be "proof-reading" right from 1960, Episode 1.

I'm hoping I can input more valuable information as and when I get the hang of it all. Great site by the way - I'm not only addicted to the Street, but also to this site now!

Regards, Karen.

Writer episode lists
That looks fine. For writers who wrote loads of episodes though it might be better to use multiple columns or a table. I'll leave it up to you. David 10:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

A request
I'm away now, all the On this Day templates for up to Saturday have been created, would you mind changing them each day if you're online? I'd appreciate it. David 09:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Your advice would be appreciated...
John, Whilst logged on last night (28th June) I noticed that an IP address had added to Episode 2345 guest cast list. In order to satisfy my curiosity, I went into the page to have a look, and noted that Tracey Langton / Christable Finch had been added - both christian names obviously spelled incorrectly!!

Within a few minutes, another IP'er jumped on board and created a page (or should I say stub at best) for Christable Finch... I've asked User:David the Wavid to delete this, as there is already a page created for the correct spelling of Christabel.

I've noticed that this second IP'er has over the past few days created around 12 other pages that are pretty much worthless... Would you advise me to add a stub category to all of these, for them to be looked over at another time? I just feel that if they're caught as and when they happen, it's easier to keep track and don't get lost with all the other pages.

I'd appreciate your advice, thanks. --Karen2310 10:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks John. I'll know what to do with regards to this kind of thing in the future. I've just removed wrong categories (ie. births) from 5 of these actor pages, added 10 stubs and now just await the Christable Finch page to be deleted. Cheers.--Karen2310 12:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Minor Characters
Hi John,

I sent this message over email but not sure whether you'd pick it up as quick - if at all - as my copy went to junk mail! Anyway... as you may have noticed, I've been rather busy with categories over the last few days... I'm just looking at minor characters and saw where you'd edited the Night Nurse (1960) page - and deleted the category of 'Coronation Street Characters' from it. It was my understanding that the list of Characters (from the Navigation bar) was supposed to be built up into an exhaustive list with the inclusion of all minor and major characters.

Maybe I've lost the plot though, but in that case shouldn't every character (either major or minor) have a 'Coronation Street Character' category added? If so, it will be another mammoth task but I'm up for the challenge! Regards. --Karen2310 16:03, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. It'll probably be easier for me to just post this in David's talk page too and await his advice. --Karen2310 16:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Not happy
Quote from Forum:Linking to categories:

I must admit over the course of the day I have realised the merit of a taxi driver page (which could show drivers chronologically, years active, firm worked for etc) which would obviously be more detailed than a simple category page...--TellyFan 01:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

John, if this was such a rubbish idea, why didn't you say so at the time when you replied, instead of randomly deleting links I'd prepared for such a page 3 months later?? I believe the Rita May article was deemed acceptable as a Featured Article by David. If the link shouldn't have been there I'm sure he'd have said at the time (and he has also seen and replied to the forum page). If I'd gotten round to creating the page, would you have decided to delete that, too?? I was under the impression that wiki rules state good faith edits shouldn't be altered without an explanation given. I'd appreciate it if you would please refrain from random unexplained edits to my contributions like this in the future. Thanks. TellyFan 13:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, well we all make mistakes. For instance in my last posting I enquired whether you'd have deleted my page - well clearly not, since you do not have the powers to do such a thing!
 * While we're on the subject though I've also noticed you on occasions delinking various talk pages. I know this isn't wikipedia, but the principles are the same, and they do advise there NOT to do this. It is not necessary and can even change the context of what has been written. This is why this has particularly annoyed me - in particular, in conversations about "Zealink" as I call him, it now looks as if I am complaining at the mere mention of people being, for example, British, when in fact what I am talking about is the fact that the contributor has written British . Again, I would appreciate it if you refrained from doing this in future. I am aware that David has done this a bit too so I shall mention it to him too in the interests of fairness.
 * I know I haven't been about much of late so sorry to come back all moaney, but I did want to raise this issue at some point, and after what I wrote yesterday it seemed best to get it out of the way. I'll try and get back into contributing properly soon, for now though it'll just be a Connie update lol.TellyFan 15:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I have carefully read your reasoning but if I am honest I don't really see the relevance. Its not as if you would see a link to 'British' and think, "oh, we need an article with that title". Neither could it be said at this stage that it would be taking a place in the wanted list that a genuine wanted article could have (unless the number of 'British' links hit double figures). Even if it did, is not a list of 998 wanted pages (+ 'British' and 'Dutch' - I believe the only red links I have put in talk) enough to be getting on with? I think in most cases you are right that we should avoid making red links in talk to pages that may well not be created, but I was making a point with mine which was much less wordy (I do try believe it or not lol!) than the alternative. I do also think we should be able to use common sense when looking at the wanted list to consider whether the page is actually wanted or not. I think the majority of red links removed (e.g. those created by Robin Patterson) were for categories - since the wanted categories list currently numbers 9 and presumably also goes up to 1000, I think again common sense can prevail when looking through what is wanted.
 * I'm not suggesting we should make a habit of creating red links on talk pages, only that if the odd one slips through it is unnecessary to remove it. It's not 'very dangerous', and neither should we be worried if their are permanent red links on Special Pages. You may be interested to realise how lucky we are compared to wikipedia actually by the way - we currently have a list of all those with 12 links or more - over there it is set to only display those with more than 20, which seems a rather odd policy!
 * I do also want to make clear that this isn't a BIG deal for me. I am a bit annoyed that the context of some of my posts have been changed to make me look rather silly by apparantly complaining that a contributor is mentioning nationalities when that wasn't my point at all lol, but other than that I just wanted to say 'it's not neccessary'. Since you explained why you feel it is, I felt I should present the other side of the argument for your consideration.TellyFan 01:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi John,
 * the "To Do" page written by David states: "All Wanted Pages need to be created" - so which is it? Is the 'Wanted Pages' a true, full and 100% accurate list of pages that the site needs or not?
 * This has actually highlighted something quite amusing - it was actually Notdoppler who wrote that on the To Do page, and just three days later he wrote a comment here: [] (recently changed by Karen) knowing full well that one of those pages would never be created - so he didn't even follow his own advice!!
 * I think either a) the 'To Do' page comment needs adjusting in some way (and since you asked, no it isn't 100% accurate at the moment), or more realistically, b) the Manual of Style needs updating to advise not to link in talk or to use the nowiki tag (as I have now done in the 'British' link from July 13). I would also recommend when links are altered in future that this is how they are changed, thus keeping what had actually been typed.
 * I think Notdoppler amply demonstrated there isn't really a right or wrong answer here - I was going to say I was wrong till I realised the Notdoppler connection! But in hindsight I do think there are times when an unneeded link on the Wanted Page wouldn't actually be obviously not needed by common-sense alone.
 * So, in short, I am converted to the aim set out in the To-Do list, but still think using nowiki is a better alternative to delinking :) TellyFan 01:56, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi John, I'm back! I took some extra time out from last Sunday knowing the closure of the DWF was imminent! I should start cropping up some more fairly soon!
 * Just wanted to say, to be fair to Notdoppler - what I said was wrong. There wouldn't have been a permanent red link on that page because I'd forgotten he'd set one up as a redirect to the other! Anyway, at least we now agree on the best way of changing them in the future :)TellyFan 00:43, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Elsie
I was thinking that. A good way to be correct but acknowledge the error. David 13:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, sorry if I wasn't clear. David 14:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Contributions
Thank you for your very kind words John, it's nice to know that what I'm doing is worthwhile and upto standard. I initially joined the site last month with the intention of correcting grammar and spelling - being new to all things Wikia, I didn't know how to do anything else! Having picked up some more editing skills along the way, I'm finding myself with daily dilemnas... should I correct what's already been created? tidy up the jungle of pages that aren't upto standard? sift through and amend mistakes in the 'wanted pages'? create pages to get them off the wanted list? and so the list of tasks goes on. Anyway, I've decided to tackle a bit of everything each day - which for me is the easiest option and I suppose the quickest way to understand more about different aspects of the site.

There are only us small bunch that seem to appear daily to tackle everything, you and David do so much hard work between you - you're both so creative. As you say, many other contributions make your heart sink. I tend to look through them all as soon as I log in.

Anyway, that's enough of my harping on. Regards, Karen. --Karen2310 11:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Link errors
John, I noticed yesterday that you were amending links from "Coronation Street|street" to "Coronation Street|Street". In the same sort of problem, I've found that most of the links are "the Kabin" instead of "The Kabin". Is there a shortcut way of amending or is it just a case of manually going through them all? I don't mind - it'll be something else on my list of tasks. Also, I've noticed when browsing through the wanted pages... there is a page needed for "Eccles", and looking quickly through the links have realised some are for the Barlows dog and some are for the Salford town. Should I put (dog) in the link for the former, or something to that effect? Again, with something similar to the first problem. When the page for "Freshco" eventually gets created, some of the links as it stands at the moment will read Freshcos, Freshcoe and Freshcoes. (The ones for Freshco's will be ok, as it should read Freshco's.) - Again, something to be looked over? I think I've probably waffled on a bit too long there, but would appreciate your advice with the above. Thanks in advance. Karen. --Karen2310 16:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Phew, well I know what I'll be cracking on with for the next few days/weeks!


 * Street - We're in agreement with that, reference to a street in general should be lower case, but in a 'shortening' of Coronation Street, it should be upper case. (I did start to change a few myself, but retreated! (I'm still apprehensive of making a lot of changes without asking).


 * The Kabin - I'll plough through the list of links and amend what's needed.


 * Eccles - I'll change the Salford one to (town).


 * Freshco - You're right, they'll all have to be changed - I was thinking that the ones for "Freshco's" would be ok, but they'd either have to be cleaned up with the others or pipe-linked.

Wish me luck! --Karen2310 17:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Broken redirects
John, not sure if we're in agreement over this one, but I've just had a look through the broken redirects. I appreciate the redirects if actors or characters have been credited as one name and they change to another. (ie. Ace Bhatti, Eve Sykes/Elliott, Katherine/Katie McDonald), or redirecting a shortened version to its full page title (ie. United States to United States of America) or, an example from the Wanted Pages off the top of my head, to redirect Weatherfield General to Weatherfield General Hospital. What I am a bit concerned about are broken redirects on incorrect spelling or grammar, (such as Denise Welsh to Denise Welch, Elsie Tanner - List Of Appearances to Elsie Tanner - List of appearances). I'm wondering if it would be better to take the redirects off the pages and amend the links individually - there shouldn't be too many in those instances. Putting it into perspective, and giving a better example, it would be like redirecting Freshco's, Freshcos, Freshcoe, Freshcoe's and Freshcoes all to Freshco! (NB. I've also sent you an email - hope you don't mind, not sure whether it will have caught up in your junk mail filter or not). Regards, --Karen2310 13:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Plugging away
John, I've compiled a list (with some I know that I have missed - which I will eventually look back over) of medical staff from the wanted lists and fixed a few links along the way. Just to let you know I'm focusing on creating these 160+ minor character profiles for the foreseeable future and amending the actor profiles accordingly. If you spot something I'm doing wrong, then please feel free to say! However, I've got family staying with me from Sunday until next Friday, so a lack of contributions will be a reflection of not being online, rather than the fact I've given up. Good to see your continuing hard work too. Regards, --Karen2310 12:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!!
Just a quick line to say congratulations for creating the 10,000th article. I knew you'd just beat me to it since I hadn't got any more characters researched at the time. Here's to the next 10,000! --Karen2310 16:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

hi

do you have any pics or a video of the snog between natalie and colin barnes from the 3rd feb 1999 episode?

Formatting
Hi John, I just wanted to ask a quick question about the hyphen corrections. Is the aim to amend the bigger hyphens in the plots and Episode Info boxes as well as the cast lists? I didn't just want to amend the cast if the whole lot needs to be done on each episode. Congratulations on getting your 25,000th edit by the way, I was so busy editing earlier and only just noticed! --Karen2310 20:34, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the mail, I did reply! One thrown back yesterday (19th August) - not sure whether you've picked it up yet though. Regards, --Karen2310 10:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sidney Livingstone
John, I found out some more character information for Sidney Livingstone. To complicate matters, he has been credited as Sydney, Sidney and Sid. I added info and amended pipelinks in episodes to reflect. Regards, --Karen2310 15:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I found the info on IMDB and saw that the actor had been credited under the three different variants for his 'filmography'. Don't give up hope on finding out about the 1976 title sequence - it'll probably crop up somewhere that you least expect it to! --Karen2310 20:44, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Jane Hazlegrove
I can't find this redirect page you asked me to delete. David 16:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * John, I'm sorry if I caused any kind of conflict with regard to the spelling of the name of this actress, I certainly didn't mean to. Email sent also. Karen2310 14:34, September 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * Carrying on! :) Karen2310 14:48, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

Title sequence
I'll make that change. About the Colour strike pic, I think it's a bit trivial for a picture but we can mention it on the page maybe? David 16:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

1961
The 1961 DVD works (most of the time, it's still a bit iffy) on my new laptop, so if you have any screencap requests from the episodes on that disc it should be possible now. 1964 is fine too. David 19:44, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

Aidan/Aiden
No need for apologies John. I was a bit unsure of which was the correct spelling (although I thought it was the former) until I saw a Manchester Evening News article and confirmed it! I'm now trying to find the correct spelling of the surname of Patrick (Tussel or Tussell) to correct those too. Again, I think it's the former spelling but need some way of confirmation. Regards. Karen2310 17:49, September 29, 2009 (UTC)

Episode 19 (15th February 1961)
Greetings,

I have checked my reference point. The show was indeed recorded just days before transmission from 1961 until the late 1970's and not most of the 1960s and all of the 1970's as you suggest when you removed my note. The charectors of Jack Walkeer and Jerry Booth were both killed off (Walker in 1970 and Booth in 1975) within three weeks of the deaths of their potrayers because of the close taping and transmission dates. In fact, the show nearly had to drop production when Arthur Leslie died for a day becuase of the fact the show taped so close to transmissions. Mattfrye1 04:25, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Episode 19 (15th February 1961)
Greetings,

I have checked my reference point. The show was indeed recorded just days before transmission from 1961 until the late 1970's and not most of the 1960s and all of the 1970's as you suggest when you removed my note. The charectors of Jack Walkeer and Jerry Booth were both killed off (Walker in 1970 and Booth in 1975) within three weeks of the deaths of their potrayers because of the close taping and transmission dates. In fact, the show nearly had to drop production when Arthur Leslie died for a day becuase of the fact the show taped so close to transmissions. Mattfrye1 04:26, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Mr. Wormold/Edward Wormold
John,

I was wondering if you have any knowledge on the above character(s)? It does look as though they could be different characters (played by two different actors). Pre-1965, the role of Mr. Wormold was played by Ivor Dean. Now I've got to 1965, I've noticed that Robert Dorning - who initially appeared on cast lists credited as Edward Wormold - has also been credited as Mr. Wormold. Any thoughts on whether they are two different characters or the same character with two actors? Thanks. Karen2310 17:46, November 9, 2009 (UTC)


 * Glad you understood what I was trying to ask - I could have probably worded it better! I'll add that pipelink now (I think it's only on one episode). We have certainly both done a lot today, I've not contributed as much as I'd hoped to do recently. Karen2310 20:25, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Defaultsorts
Not a problem John, especially when you're adding so many good quality new pages. I have noticed that some of the older pages did originally have the defaultsort added, but have been wiped off again with people's edits at the end of said pages. Karen2310 15:27, November 29, 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree, the varying work does bring back some sense of positivity. Pre-congratulations also for the forthcoming 30,000th edit. Karen2310 15:45, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

The Jubilee Years
Hi John,

I've created a kind of rudimentary page for this video, but I noticed on Gallifrey Base the other day you saying you have also seen it recently. I wonder whether I can leave a fuller version and updating related pages in your capable hands? Have you seen both parts by the way? The copy I picked up was sadly only part one. I must say I was surprised Eric Rosser (I am assuming he made that particular decision) made her a former resident of no. 13 when no. 9 had been known to be empty in 1960! Though of course, if you read Daran Little's Around the Houses the Taylor family have been written out of Corrie history anyway, and the Hardmans had been back at no. 13 since 1958 (IIRC)! As official historian Daran should have known about the video, so I dunno why he didn't include the Taylors - I'd have liked to have found out a bit more about Alice's life in the Street, especially as I don't have part two! Daran could have moved Alice and family to no. 9 and we could have put her '13' claim down to false memories! Oh well!! TellyFan 03:14, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * Further to that though I would say that as we heard 'from the horse's mouth' and it is clear that Ken knew Alice, its probably best to conclude that either Daran Little 'got his facts wrong' or else was simply 'making it up' lol! I've added my notes on how the video is split up timewise onto the relevant talk page btw. TellyFan 00:15, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Stars on the street
I've been screengrabbing images from the Stars on the Street special, I see you've been doing the same. What I've done though is cropped (most of) the images so that they appear in the correct aspect ratio for the era they appear in. Now I've seen your images, I wasn't going to bother uploading them but do you think it matters or not? I'd like to hear your thoughts on this because I like the uniformity of the episode images. David 12:16, December 21, 2009 (UTC)


 * I was quite surprised to see some of the clips presented in a way that retains the original aspect ratio (on a screen), it's the first time I've ever seen this done outside the special features on the Doctor Who DVDs. Sometimes poor 4:3 ends up squashed to 16:9 in programmes like this. Good to see that didn't happen. The programme itself was a total surprise, I had no idea it was on until I saw it mentioned in the Corrie thread. David 15:07, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Character templates
Hi John, just wanted to note that I intended to use character infoboxes only on named characters. The policy certainly isn't set in stone though, my rationale was that they don't have a name to go in the banner anyway and there isn't likely to be a lot to say about the character, not enough to fill the space created by the height of the infobox. David 21:32, January 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * I honesty can't decide. Not all characters will have an infobox anyway as for example Mr. Papagopolous never appeared so he won't have one. I suppose it could be a good way to distinguish between seen and unseen characters.... I'm on the fence. I'd be happy with either scenario. How about we keep infoboxes for now, as they're easier to remove than to add so a later policy change will be simple to implement. Then again, this probably draws a line under it, doesn't it? David 19:15, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

re:Welcome Back
Thanks John!

I've been so busy with this new job, but I thought I'd try and find the time to start doing a few little odds and ends again (for now) at least. Hope you had a good Christmas and New Year. --Karen2310 16:04, February 8, 2010 (UTC)