Shouldn't it say in the duration field "1962, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1976" instead of "1962, 1966-1971, 1976", since he didn't appear consistently in those years? I suppose it doesn't matter too much, as the duration field for minor characters is apparently changing. Notdoppler 19:45, September 13, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it should be split how you've outlined since his appearances were infrequent during that time period. I would be inclined to amend it for the time-being... at least it will be a truer reflection. Karen2310 19:54, September 13, 2011 (UTC)
On reflection, yes it should be separate as you've said. David 23:37, September 13, 2011 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.