Hi, welcome to Coronation Street Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Charlie Stubbs page.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Karen2310 (talk) 01:47, August 13, 2016 (UTC)

Family categories Edit

There is a practice in place on this wiki that family categories are only created when there are at least four members to put in them, and since none of the ones you have added do, they will all be deleted! Karen2310 (talk) 07:29, August 13, 2016 (UTC)

Oh sorry! I didn't know about this and thought it would be okay due to the fact that there's two other family categories with less than four members in (the Bradshaw familywith three and the Schofield family with two). Xx-connor-xX (talk) 14:52, August 13, 2016 (UTC)

Didn't realise those two family categories had been overlooked, so I apologise! I'll delete those for now. Thanks for bringing that to our attention. The four character practice is stated on our Manual of style page, so I'll rectify that. There's also a whole host of useful info on there. Regards, Karen2310 (talk) 14:57, August 13, 2016 (UTC)

Creating new pagesEdit

Some of your pages have been deleted, specifically names that you've just decided to add links to yourself. There has been no evidence throughout the programme's history to suggest that Emily Bishop's sister Nora married into the same family of Seddons as Sally. Please don't create pages for names that aren't linked (we don't have enough information to warrant a page creation in these instances). Another page you created was nowhere near up to standard. Please ask questions if you are unsure, it saves other people time and work too! Karen2310 (talk) 09:34, November 27, 2016 (UTC)

Furthermore, please make sure that your pages are complete. The creation of Shona Ramsey's article is missing an infobox, and was also lacking a defaultsort and categories. I've just amended the latter two issues but added an "Incomplete Template" to this page. Karen2310 (talk) 07:23, December 17, 2016 (UTC)

Edit summaries Edit

Please remember to add an edit summary to every change you make to a page. Not only do we not have the time to check every single edit that's not summarised, it also highlights your own contributions to the site. Thank you. Karen2310 (talk) 23:26, November 30, 2016 (UTC)

And the second request to do this, please! Karen2310 (talk) 23:27, December 5, 2016 (UTC)

Nathan CurtisEdit

In a complete rush-job of creating a page for a character who has appeared in one episode, once more there are several things missing: no infobox, a lack of links, defaultsort and categories. Maintenance template will now be added, pending deletion if you're unwilling to address these issues. Karen2310 (talk) 17:06, December 26, 2016 (UTC)

Thank-you. Although could you please leave templates in place (as per instructions on templates!) Karen2310 (talk) 17:53, December 26, 2016 (UTC)

Blank pages Edit

I'm deleting the two pages you've just created - all they contain is an infobox and categories but absolutely no text. If you're not willing to do a bit of research to create a page proper, then it's not fair to expect someone else to finish off your work!! Karen2310 (talk) 18:21, April 2, 2017 (UTC)

What other information would there be to add other than they are the parents of known characters? If you really wanted me to add a sentence or two then I would do so. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 18:33, April 2, 2017 (UTC)
Information to these characters are found in literature. There have been many Coronation Street publications through the years which you can glean information from. This is how other character pages from pre-1960 have been created.
Also, you have "assumed" Christian Gatley's mother Cath shared the same surname and thrown a link round it to create a page. Since we don't know this, it has never been linked. Could you please work from the "Wanted pages" list as oppose making your own? Thank-you. Karen2310 (talk) 18:39, April 2, 2017 (UTC)

Roger & Sarah Brookes Edit

You might also want to research these two characters more thoroughly too..... Roger Brookes was played by Nigel Carrington and appeared in 10 episodes between 1992 & 1993, Sarah Brookes was played by Zulema Dene and appeared in 8 episodes in the same period. Karen2310 (talk) 18:55, April 2, 2017 (UTC)

Or maybe, if you know the information, you could help by putting it in instead of insulting people when they try to update the wiki further?... Xx-connor-xX (talk) 19:03, April 2, 2017 (UTC)
No insult was made. The information Karen gave is on the site for all to see, find and use.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 23:35, April 2, 2017 (UTC)
If she knew all this information I don't understand why she didn't just update it herself, I personally felt insulted by the way she called me out. If you don't see it in the same way then that is fine, but I took it as an insult. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 23:47, April 2, 2017 (UTC)
Can I ask you a question - why did you create those pages? You must be aware that they fall way short on our normal level of detail - your article on Roger Brookes is only five lines long despite him appearing in ten episodes, has no image, and doesn't mention Ted's will being contested and overturned which accounted for most of his screentime. Do you post half a page with the idea that somebody else will come along and finish the job because that's the impression given - hence our reaction. We have enough to do on this site without people giving us extra work. David (talk) 09:58, April 3, 2017 (UTC)
I think having a page, even with little detail on, is still better than having no page whatsoever. When I created the page I was actually unaware that Roger had ever turned up in the series, this was my mistake but I still don't understand why Karen would rather waste her time trying to call me out instead of just adding the details in anyway. It would have taken her the exact same amount of time to post the information onto the pages than it would have to post it here. I think this was a display of power. Nothing more. It was quite frankly rude. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 10:24, April 3, 2017 (UTC)
You're way off the mark. At the bare minimum, Karen would have to look over ten or more episode synopses and re-edit the mentions of Roger into a full article - that alone takes way longer than you suggest. To write it to our normal level of detail (as we eventually want for all articles) would entail watching some of the character's scenes - his first and last appearances at the very least, to get idea how the actor played him plus any background not mentioned in the synopses. It's a big undertaking. That's why we take issue with your pages. You're doing the easy bit and leaving the rest for us. On your first point, with main pages I agree that we should have something for various reasons which don't apply to a bit player like Roger Brookes. David (talk) 11:09, April 3, 2017 (UTC)
I just don't see the reason to call people out. All I want to do is have fun looking back on Corrie's history while also trying to help update the site, I felt the way I was called out was wrong. If you name and shame everyone who has just made a mistake nobody would want to use this site anymore. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 11:15, April 3, 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry if you feel singled out, that's certainly not my intention. The problem is that this is a massive site but we have only three admins so our work is spread very thinly. Couldn't you put the same amount of time you spend creating half a dozen articles on just one, that way you can get all the relevant info on there? As I alluded to above, watching the episodes isn't required - everything you need should be in the synopses. David (talk) 11:32, April 3, 2017 (UTC)

Re:Rude comments? Edit

I'm sorry that you thought it rude by saying I'm correcting it yet again, but in reality, I had done! As for your updates on minor characters straight after the programme, that's great - as it currently stands I work until 11pm so that's why I can't do them so readily. As for your comments about me not doing any major character statistics for "over" a month, that's not true - they were done at month end in April and they will be done at month end in May - I was on holiday from 6th - 21st May and did not plan to work on the website at that time. Karen2310 (talk) 07:01, May 30, 2017 (UTC)

Re:Uncredited Hope, Joseph and Ruby Edit

Do you mean their List of Appearances pages? It's not up to me, it's something the admins will have to decide on. --Pascal11 (talk) 21:09, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

Yes! I've been keeping a spreadsheet as I've been going along. For the two characters you mentioned:
  • Ruby was in 32 episodes in 2012, 36 in 2013, 15 in 2014 and 29 in 2015
  • Hope was in 8 episodes in 2012, 24 in 2013 and 13 in 2014. I haven't finished 2011 but she was in over 40 episodes and I don't know yet about 2010.--Pascal11 (talk) 18:50, March 31, 2018 (UTC)

New categories Edit

Please could you raise a discussion in one of the forums before creating new categories? - this is referred to in Section 7 of the Manual of style page. Thank you. Karen2310 (talk) 12:41, March 31, 2018 (UTC)

Please could you stop amending the long-established categories regarding residents and debate the issue first on the community pages please, again as per the manual of style?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 18:29, April 5, 2018 (UTC)
I apologise, I was finding it extremely hard to understand the categories in their current states and did not know that there was to be discussions on such matters. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 18:30, April 5, 2018 (UTC)
Okay, blocked removed. Please read section 7 that Karen referred you to above a week ago, reverse your changes and begin the discussion. Thank you.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 18:38, April 5, 2018 (UTC)
Where do I hold the discussion at? Karen's talk page? Xx-connor-xX (talk) 18:47, April 5, 2018 (UTC)
Also I am unable to reverse the changes as I can't delete categories, how long do blocks last on your account as it says I still am. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 18:49, April 5, 2018 (UTC)
Connor, once again you are adding new categories without discussion in contravention of the manual of style (section 7) - something you were made aware of on 5th April as per the above. Do we have to block again?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 08:52, June 14, 2018 (UTC)
Apologises, I forgot that the discussion would take place on the forums - I was expecting it to take place in the talk page of the added categories. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 10:18, June 14, 2018 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I agree about the new category of Underworld cleaners but I can't spot the issue being raised for discussion?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 15:01, December 10, 2018 (UTC)
Hey, I did post it to the talk page. However, I thought it would have been acceptable to create the category as I was told last time that 3+ workers were acceptable for a category addition. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 15:07, December 10, 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 15:38, December 10, 2018 (UTC)
Although which talk page? Nothing on the Underworld one?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 15:39, December 10, 2018 (UTC)
Ah sorry! It was the Rovers cleaners that I raised a discussion about (on the list of rovers staff talkpage), I'd got confused and thought I'd raised it about the Underworld cleaners too. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 16:16, December 10, 2018 (UTC)

Producer pages Edit

Connor, the changes you have made to the producer pages have far, far, far too much unnecessary detail and far too many links in them. Please reduce considerably. Thank you.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:08, May 25, 2018 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. I have adopted the same style as Kate Oates’ page for both Stuart Blackburn and Phil Collinson’s pages. This style clearly outlines IMPORTANT information such as; which main/notable minor characters they have introduced, which characters they have reintroduced and which characters they have recast - before going on to briefly cover the main plots and storylines of each producdr’s era. No other section on this Wikia is dedicated to explaining which producer introduced which characters. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:15, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
Then Kate Oates' page needs changing as well. It looks like a mass of links with no coherent whole. I agree about the storylines but the characters are a big NO! Please reverse.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:18, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
I won’t be reversing. You can delete my work if you wish but it took me a long time to piece that information together, I truely believe that it needs reflected here. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:23, May 25, 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. Goodbye.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:24, May 25, 2018 (UTC)

Unfair blocking! FTAO Admins Edit

I have literally only just discovered that I’ve been blocked, I find this absolutely outrageous. I have done nothing wrong whatsoever, certainly nothing deserving a year-long block. What is the reason for this treatment? My last edits were all done on Stuart Blackburn and Phil Collinson’s pages and were not vandalism/misinformation, however it was mutually agreed the work didn’t fit and the edits were undone and the pages were locked. Why was I banned for this? Thanks. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 15:54, May 31, 2018 (UTC)

Actor pages Edit

Please could you add to the actor pages you have created today rather than leaving them in their "raw" state? The other pages you created recently were of a good standard and it would be great if you could copy that style.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 19:54, June 7, 2018 (UTC)

Usually I use IMDB as a reliable source but none of the recent few actors I've created seem to have am IMDB page and after research on other sites I'm unable to find any information of their other acting credits - what should be done in this situation? Xx-connor-xX (talk) 20:10, June 7, 2018 (UTC)
Ah - I see! In that case, I would put something along the lines of "No other known parts are credited to this actor". It may be that this was their first proper role and in years to come we need to revisit such pages (there are a fair few of them) and see if any further roles have come to light in the interim. It may be that they are usually walk-ons and that this will be their only credited role ever. Thank you for trying to keep up with these pages. There are about 2000+ of them that need creating!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 20:14, June 7, 2018 (UTC)
That's a good idea, to put that there are no other known parts. I've done this before when the individual has had an IMDB page but Coronation Street was the only credit, I didn't want to do it here in case I was mistaken. I'll add it to the articles now. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 20:20, June 7, 2018 (UTC)
As I said, there are a lot of such people, even going back to the 1960s. Other good sources to check for credits aside from IMDB are the BBC Genome site and Theatricalia (though that is very such a site in progress but it does bring up the odd gem)--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 20:23, June 7, 2018 (UTC)
Other useful information (hopefully) can be a very brief "padding out" of role info - ie. "Surgeon who attended [whoever] in May 2018 when 'such and such' happened" and a general google search on the actor's name instead of being reliant on specific sites. EG. I've just done said general search on Julie Hannan and found a site which contains information on another TV credit, rafts of theatre credits and graduation details. Karen2310 (talk) 10:26, June 8, 2018 (UTC)
Bump. Karen2310 (talk) 08:50, June 21, 2018 (UTC)

An Apology Edit

Sorry about those edits I did, to be honest I'm not even sure myself why I did them. I promise you that it won't happen again. Helloyoungchaps (talk) 15:36, June 12, 2018 (UTC)helloyoungchaps

Maternity duration gapsEdit

Shouldn't be reflected no since the actresses are still under contract at this time. Karen2310 (talk) 11:39, June 22, 2018 (UTC)

thanks mate for the help mate :) (Spice boys (talk) 12:25, June 25, 2018 (UTC) 

i was going to try and put information but you beat me to it (Spice boys (talk) 12:31, June 25, 2018 (UTC)

Departures Edit

Although I don't agree with Rosie's departure not being counted, I think Eva, Adam and Susie's are different. The trio have left in a taxi with no word about returning. Just because it's been announced on new sites shouldn't be any different - Jim and Katie's pages haven't been changed despite it being revealed Katie is alive. Danielroxheaps 01:24, July 28, 2018 (UTC)

There is no point whatsoever changing information which will have to be reverted in less than a week, the same was done with Eileen's page when it was announced she'd be back. It just isn't necessary to give ourselves more work to do. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 01:34, July 28, 2018 (UTC)
You do have a point but Eva will be leaving regardless, most likely with Susie so it would probably be easiest to change it now and just change the last appearance date when she returns and departs again. Danielroxheaps 03:10, July 28, 2018 (UTC)

Character images Edit

Do you need help with knowing how to do character images?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 11:58, August 4, 2018 (UTC)

I’ve added pictures in the past but I’ve always seemed to make them the wrong size, etc Xx-connor-xX (talk) 12:06, August 4, 2018 (UTC)

New catagories Edit

Connor, the manual of style states that new categories must be discussed first before being created. Before I delete your changes please could I ask you to explain a good rationale in order that they can remain.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 00:38, August 22, 2018 (UTC)

This was discussed, I left it for nearly a month to see if anyone wanted to add anything to the discussion, but nobody else did so I thought it would be acceptable to create them. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 00:47, August 22, 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. I must confess missed that one. Thank you - and I mean that seriously - thank you for following the rules and procedure on this change and your attention to this matter,--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 00:50, August 22, 2018 (UTC)
No problem! Xx-connor-xX (talk) 00:53, August 22, 2018 (UTC)

Michael McGuire Edit

Terrific article! More please! Thank you--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 20:37, September 11, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! Xx-connor-xX (talk) 20:49, September 11, 2018 (UTC)

Task Edit

Connor, how do you fancy being the person responsible for the creation and maintenance of a certain set of pages we need on the site? As you know, David, Karen and I have "divided and conquered" certain pages over the years to keep them up to date but we have a new need and can't take on the extra workload. Interested?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:06, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

Yes it sounds good, I think I'll be up for it. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:08, September 21, 2018 (UTC)
Great! It's to create and maintain the "list of appearances" for places. Some are created already such as Alan Howard's Salon and the Friends of Weatherfield Hospital Charity Shop but we need the rest doing. Several things: 1) At the moment, it can only be where the place made its first appearance after 1975, so the Rovers and the main terraced houses are out for now as we haven't yet noted them all. 2) Some of them will need to be on a separate page to the main article as they will be too big and some of them might potentially have to have separate pages for the decades. Ken Barlow - List of appearances is our biggest overall page on the site with well over 4000 entries and, in all honesty, the only page I could ever see getting that large is the Rovers - that's a future problem. Such separate pages will need a new category. 3) Where we have noted down specific rooms on the episode pages in italics, you should do the same. Where a place has been in different locations, then my preference is for separate lists but let's discuss that in the forum. 4) Careful consideration would have to be given to a place that only appeared in one or two episodes - again a forum discussion with your ideas please. It's not glamorous and will be a lot of tedious work to get going but the three of us have been there on many other "list" pages on the site and you just have to get through it by sheer hard slog. Still interested?? --Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:18, September 21, 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the list of appearances for the businesses/places is something I have been interested in since someone started it (a few years back now I believe, or I may be misremembering). I was a little disappointed when the work seemed to have stopped, but of course it is a complicated and time-consuming effort which I will be priveledged to take over. I presume the same rules for the character LOAs apply - with the businesses only getting their own page when they hit 50 appearances? If so, I'll start work on the newest main business - Speed Daal, in order to get a feel for the page layouts and such. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:25, September 21, 2018 (UTC)
I also presume that we're talking about when someone steps foot in the building rather than it just being seen on the street? Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:27, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I think the 50 appearances rule should be a good one to follow. As regards what's goes on, it should exactly duplicate what's on the episode page. That means for maintenance it would be best to do the updates once the episode page is created. If you think something is missing from an episode page, say so. As a rule of thumb, if someone walks down Rosamund Street with Coronation Street in the background, I add the former but not the latter. I do note what parts of indoor sets are constructed in studio and seen on screen. If someone walks through a hallway of an house and that hallway is seen on screen as part of the outdoor set, I do note it, as does David. As I said, basically follow what we put on the episode page.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:38, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

And thank you!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:38, September 21, 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, I understand completely now. I am already well into recording the Speed Daal totals. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:39, September 21, 2018 (UTC)

Great!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:41, September 21, 2018 (UTC) Connor, the work you're doing is going well. Thank you. After being away for a couple of days, I put a note on the Speed Dahl talk page earlier on. While my comment about two columns still holds, on reflection it should perhaps be for places where there are sub-divisions such as Underworld and Speed Dahl while the solicitors can have four columns as there's nothing to add there in italics.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 17:38, September 24, 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I'll also implement the changes on the appearance pages already completed. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 17:43, September 24, 2018 (UTC)
Thank you!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 19:59, September 24, 2018 (UTC)
How is this task going?--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 12:31, October 10, 2018 (UTC)
Good, I'm actually doing Inkerman Street right now. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 12:32, October 10, 2018 (UTC)

Why I made the changes to Paula Martin, restated Edit

I stated clearly why I made the changes to Paula Martin.  Paula said jealous and angry, though not enough to hit a judge.  Horrified is not synonomous with jealous and angry and sounds like an exageration of Tim's feelings, based on the feelings of the person choosing to distort the canon words of the show.  That the squash partner is also a judge speaks is a very relevant piece of information to reveal her character, as she is a solicitor.  It reveals lines she might cross in her work as a solicitor and foreshadows her crossing those lines less egregariously with Sophie.  Her bio reads like she may or may not have been married to Tim and I found the ambiguity odd, since they were married.  Do you understand now? (AiKana (talk) 06:15, September 27, 2018 (UTC))

I don't appreciate you accusing me of attempting to "distort the canon words of the show". We don't have to use the exact words used in the show - the edits you made prevented the section from running smoothly in my opinion, "horrified" was a more accurate description as - not only would he have been "jealous" and "angry" but he would have been shocked too. The words "jealous" and "angry" were an under-exaggeration, and made it look like Tim was in the wrong whereas these would be the reactions from anyone who was cheated on. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 09:54, September 27, 2018 (UTC)
You are distoring canon words of the show. If you want to go on Tim's page and talk about how horrified he might have been, be my guest. This is Paula's page and the canon words of the show are relevent to her character, as I've expanded upon. The imagined reaction that her ex might have had, says things about her ex, not her. You just made more assumptions. Who on earth would think a jealous husband, who is angry, when he finds his wife cheating on him to be in the wrong? Certainly, not I. I'm not a fan of adultery or cheating, though I accept the consequences of my feelings on the subject, when choosing to watch a soap opera. I personally was shocked at Ms. Christian's blase response to Paula telling her, but then I remember her parents are infidelity central, who all get along. I do think Paula was understating things, but not to make her ex sound in the wrong. That's the consequence of the softened lens of time. There's just as much chance, he knew his wife fancied women and men. We don't know if he was shocked or not to see his suspicions realized. There are a lot of possible emotions, but it isn't your place to choose the one you identify with and discard the ones we are certain about. (AiKana (talk) 13:05, October 2, 2018 (UTC))
I don't wish to continue a conversation with someone who accuses me of such things, we don't have to write everything word for word - Tim may have been jealous and angry, "horrified" by the betrayal covers both of those words. You have a tendency to overwrite, most notably in your previous post on Paula's talk-page which I refused to read in it's entirety due to being so long.Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:09, October 2, 2018 (UTC)

Josh TuckerEdit

Thank you for expanding the page and adding onto it. VB1989 (talk) 09:56, September 28, 2018 (UTC)


Connor, please remember that all character pages should be written (in entirety) in the past tense? a number of articles you've created recently contain a mixture of both past and present tenses. Many thanks. Karen2310 (talk) 14:33, October 12, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, just changed the tense in my last page. Are there any others you know about? Xx-connor-xX (talk) 14:36, October 12, 2018 (UTC)
The only other one screaming out to me just now is the article on Charles Beaumont. Karen2310 (talk) 15:35, October 12, 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 15:38, October 12, 2018 (UTC)

Jacqueline Reid Edit

Connor, where did you get your info from that this person was dead in 1971? In Episode 1110 she is spoken of in the present tense.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 13:40, November 15, 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I’m not sure right now - as it was a while since I made the edits. It must have been mentioned in one of the pages on this site, as I haven’t used any off-wikia sources. I’ll have a thorough check when I’m able to get on properly (I’m using my phone now). Xx-connor-xX (talk) 16:27, November 15, 2018 (UTC)
I've just had a look and I can't see where I've gotten the information from. I'll change it when I have time later, but I'll keep an eye out if there is something with conflicting info. Thanks. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 16:59, November 15, 2018 (UTC)
References to both Charles and Jacqueline too in Episode 1335. Ken tells Uncle Albert that he and Janet went to Keswick, saw her parents, got a license and got married. Karen2310 (talk) 09:59, November 18, 2018 (UTC)

Deleted pagesEdit

Connor, I've deleted these pages as outlined in Section 2.3 (bullet point 9) of the Manual of style page. The Lanscombe pages (Cressida aside, because she's specifically mentioned in episodes) have been deleted because they only linked on this wiki through Cressida's name. Please don't recreate them and the other pages that have been deleted which were only created through name association. The "substantial information" you've added could be instead added onto the pages for Cressida, Henry or both! Thank you. Karen2310 (talk) 13:33, November 19, 2018 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I thought the new rule meant the pages needed to have information other than the fact they're Cressida's parents. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 13:40, November 19, 2018 (UTC)
Not sure where my latest reply went, but I definitely wrote one (!) You've raised a valid point with regard the Lanscombes so I've reinstated those two pages. Even though they are only linked through their daughter, there's enough information to warrant article pages. As you quite rightly say - aside of course from the links to relatives of regular characters throughout the years - others which would contain very sparse information at best should be left with delinked names. Regards, Karen2310 (talk) 14:51, November 19, 2018 (UTC)
I'll keep it in mind when creating pages in future. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 14:54, November 19, 2018 (UTC)

6 Coronation StreetEdit

Just to let you know, Alex's stay at No.6 was extremely brief (approx 2 weeks). Episode 9069 (2nd Jan 2017) states: "Roy discovers from Cathy that Alex now lives in an assisted flat as there isn’t room at No.6". Karen2310 (talk) 19:58, January 10, 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for that! Xx-connor-xX (talk) 22:05, January 10, 2019 (UTC)

Abi FranklinEdit

I've asked ITV to confirm the status of Abi and Lucas as there appears to be some confusion. If I may be a bit forthright about this matter, I don't like my edits being reversed without discussion and there are talk pages which allow for that process.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 16:37, February 5, 2019 (UTC)

Oh, sorry I wasn’t aware. If you’d reversed my changes I wouldn’t have changed them back again as to avoid edit warring. On the subject, Seb referred to Lucas as his mum’s “boyfriend” when he confessed to Faye about his home life, but when we were introduced to Abi in October 2017 it was made clear that he was Seb’s step-father. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 16:50, February 5, 2019 (UTC)
That's okay - just let's have a discussion in the first place please. Now, ITV have replied to me with the following: "I'm not sure where the name Lucas comes from. As far as I know, the twins' dad was named as Darren in 9265. He wasn't married to Abi, whose children all have her surname. If you have a source for Lucas, let me know and I'll see if we've contradicted ourselves somewhere!" The person who made the change to Lucas was your good self, on 14th September 2018. I've checked the episodes immediately preceding this and can't find any mention of Lucas. Any idea where it came from? For now, I'll make the change to Darren.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 09:27, February 6, 2019 (UTC)
Actually, I may have found it. You made the change to Charlie and Lexi's page on 26/4/18 stating it came from Friday's episode meaning 9435/6. In the latter, Seb states to his mother "All those years on the gear shacked up with losers" and I think you misheard it. Understandable and thank you for making it clear where the note actually came from! At least the matter's sorted out now.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 09:37, February 6, 2019 (UTC)
Oh you’re right, I’ve just watched the episode where she mentions Darren in 2017. I must’ve misheard, this will have to be changed in Abi’s infobox too but I’m unable to as I’m on phone. Thanks. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 10:14, February 6, 2019 (UTC)
Just done it.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 10:18, February 6, 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Lucas is also mentioned once more near to the start of her bio so should be replaced with Darren. Removing every trace of that embarrassing mistake! Xx-connor-xX (talk) 10:24, February 6, 2019 (UTC)
Cheers. We all do it!--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 11:19, February 6, 2019 (UTC)

Wayne Hayes Edit

Connor, thanks for the excellent update to Wayne's page but, as you know, we only have portrait shots for guest character pages and no other images.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 11:06, March 26, 2019 (UTC)

Oh ok! I thought we’d agreed that if a character had plenty of appearances they could have other images / a bio section despite being classed as minor (similar to Josh Tucker’s page. Thanks. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 12:57, March 26, 2019 (UTC)
I checked with David and he said that there are some instances where a character reoccurs over many years with lots of storylines (such as Dave Smith) as that does lead to more images but in this case he agreed with me that Wayne doesn't warrant the extras. Josh needs some thought.--Jtomlin1uk (talk) 14:17, March 26, 2019 (UTC)

Im Confused too but the Sigh outside of the prison said Norcross (Spice boys (talk) 15:39, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

its on YouTube Edit

Type in Nick's Time in Prison Doesn't Start well and you well see the Sigh (Spice boys (talk) 16:08, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

I can’t watch right now, but will later. If that’s the case a discussion will have to be had as the current page for Norcross is very evidently a woman’s only prison. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 18:28, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

Ok mate (Spice boys (talk) 19:00, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

just to let you know Edit

the Sigh happens at 1:11 (Spice boys (talk) 19:05, July 9, 2019 (UTC)

have you watch the video? Edit

have you watch the video yet (Spice boys (talk) 15:28, July 10, 2019 (UTC)

Not yet, also can you please keep the discussion under one title. Three for every comment is unneeded. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 17:53, July 10, 2019 (UTC)

i was wrong Edit

The Visiting Room Sigh said highfield sorry for use a different discussion mate (Spice boys (talk) 20:24, July 10, 2019 (UTC)

ive watch more theres a Clear Sigh that says Highfield in the hall ive watch corrie late today (Spice boys (talk) 20:47, July 10, 2019 (UTC)

Relationship sub-headingsEdit

Hi Connor,

Could you please refrain from creating sub-headings in the main character relationship sections (family, rivals, etc.)? This is a major change that should have been pitched in the forum first. Thank you. David (talk) 22:40, November 9, 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, when I first started adding the sub-headings I was copying Ken Barlow's page (which already had a sub-heading for "parents" and "children / grandchildren". I'll pitch the idea now. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 22:58, November 9, 2019 (UTC)

As an appendum to the above message, could you think twice before adding so many sub-sections to the relationships? On Sunita Alahan's page I've cut them down from nine to four - the Parekhs, Dev, Amber and Karl. These sections should be used to write about the side-stories which don't belong in the biography or are only given a cursory mention there. To give Matt Davis as an example, is there anything to say about their relationship that isn't already in Sunita's biography? Look at Alf Roberts's page to see how this section should be used correctly. David (talk) 23:04, November 9, 2019 (UTC)

I have always looked at the section as expanding upon any 'notable' relationships, which I would include Matt Davis under in Sunia's case, where readers can learn about without having to go through the biography. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 23:10, November 9, 2019 (UTC)
The main reason it exists is so that the biography doesn't get side-tracked with minor storylines. Going through every storyline in both sections would be redundant. It's just a question of what belongs where. David (talk) 23:26, November 9, 2019 (UTC)
I think that's a shame, in my opinion there's no harm in quickly summarising the storylines and relationship between two characters in a couple of paragraphs (if they're notable enough). For example; Sinead Osbourne was introduced to the show as a rival for Katy Armstrong and I was able to note their history in two paragraphs. With Alf's relationship section, I fear there's no organisation - why is Audrey Roberts the last relationship in the list? Sinead has a lot of notable relationships to list, none of which I think you'd remove (Daniel Osbourne, Bertie, Beth and Craig, Kirk, Ken Barlow, Katy Armstrong, etc), and I think a few sub-headings are necessary to help navigation and order. Xx-connor-xX (talk) 23:31, November 9, 2019 (UTC)
Connor, we have to draw the limit somewhere otherwise Ken Barlow's article would be longer than War and Peace. I'm afraid we have different opinions on notability, especially when it comes to Sinead Tinker's article and I'm afraid I will be trimming it when I get the chance.
That's understandable, your opinion is final - even when presented with solid reasoning (hence why my appeal on the Matt Carter talkpage was ignored for the most part). I want to stress that I didn't do this as a way to implement a major change without asking, I took the sub-headings on Albert Tatlock and Ken Barlow's pages and added a few that I thought would have been accepted without question.
Audrey's relationship goes last on Alf's page because they are in chronlogical order. David (talk) 23:52, November 9, 2019 (UTC)
*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+