User talk:Soaper1234/Archive 5

Reference errors on 20 January

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Holby City (series 19) page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Unreliable source

I disagree with the tagging of the YouTube video as an unreliable source, as the information comes from the official Hollyoaks YouTube account, and whilst it may not be the most formal, it still gives relevant information that has been backed up from other sources, such as Digital Spy. Yoshi876 (talk) 00:12, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

You're actually probably right Yoshi876. I just hadn't looked in to it correctly and only looked at previous misuses of it. My apologies Soaper1234 (talk) 14:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Hi,

I don't understand this what you're saying. All main cast, including children, have had infoboxes across most soaps. Is there any rule or agreement you can show to prove this?

Thanks,

Grangehilllover (talk) 18:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Grangehilllover. As JuneGloom07 has pointed out in this edit, the infobox should be hidden to reduce the amount of whitespace (per WP:WHITE). Thanks, Soaper1234 (talk) 10:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the List of Casualty characters page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

{{wayback}} in Clare Bates

Why did you add a non-functioning template to this article? diff. -- GreenC 16:34, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Green Cardamom: Oops, complete mistake. I was undoing edits saying that she reprised the role in 2017 and was killed in a bus crash. My apologises, Soaper1234 (talk) 16:40, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Casualty (series 30)/GA1

Hi again, Soaper1234. As you may have seen already, an editor has expressed willingness to review the Casualty (series 30) article against the Good Article criteria. Just thought I'd inform you in case you were unaware. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 22:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi ElectrodeandtheAnode hope you're well! Yes it popped up on my watchlist last night - hopefully we will get positive results! Soaper1234 (talk) 10:47, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Louise Mitchell page thing

Hi,

Just so you know, I really don't mind you adding to the pages I'm working on, because I sometimes get a bit jammed with words and stuff and when others help, I can learn from it. Thank you for what you are doing.

Grangehilllover (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Grangehilllover. It's still on my watchlist, but I know I started to barge in and then I started something and left it for several weeks so I'll think I'll take myself out of it for now. Soaper1234 (talk) 07:35, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

OK, but you can add whenever you want :). Grangehilllover (talk) 09:00, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Lofty Chiltern

Hello! Your submission of Lofty Chiltern at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! - Vivvt (Talk) 06:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Soaper1234, it's been over a month since you posted to the nomination. If you wish this nomination to continue, please let us know how you're progressing and if you're still interesting in this becoming a DYK. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:40, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I wish to continue with this nomination. Thank you. Soaper1234 - talk 06:09, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Then you had better say so on the nomination page, and explain your progress there. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:20, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Casualty old episode summaries

Thank you for your thanks! It's something I'm doing very sporadically and inefficiently when I've got a spare moment but I'm glad it's appreciated. Skteosk (talk) 08:08, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Soaper1234. You have new messages at Talk:Casualty (series 30)/GA1.
Message added 03:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I finished going through all the Episode Summaries and gave the adjustments that I think need to be made. As soon as the Summaries are adjusted I will consider WP:GA Criteria 1A(Prose) to be fulfilled and I think I will probably be able to finish up my GA Review shortly. Shearonink (talk) 03:52, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Casualty (series 30)

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 16:38, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of awards and nominations received by Holby City, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Metro (newspaper) and David Ames. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of EastEnders characters (2000), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Matthew Robinson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Scarlett Snow

That's what happens when you edit late at night. Thank you for correcting it. - JuneGloom07 Talk 19:37, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: Haha, no problem :) Soaper1234 - talk 19:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

User:ElectrodeandtheAnode/Reap the Whirlwind (Casualty)

Thought I'd come over to your talk page to ask this: I don't suppose you have anything in any of the soap magazines about the recent "Reap the Whirlwind" pair of episodes which can be added to a reception section do you? No worries if you do not, just thought it would be worth an ask. Many thanks in advance. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 21:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: I don't, sorry, but it might be worth asking some other users. JuneGloom07 - would you happen to have any articles from the episodes? Soaper1234 - talk 05:44, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I always get Inside Soap (and most Soaplifes now), so yes I can take a look for you. Only problem is that I'm in Ireland at the moment, so I won't be able to get you the info for about a week. – JuneGloom07 Talk 10:25, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: Thank you JuneGloom07, enjoy your holiday! Soaper1234 - talk 16:46, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Too Old for This Shift

The article Too Old for This Shift you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Too Old for This Shift for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 02:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Bone Bill

Hi, thanks for participating in the DYK process. Please be aware that if you review an article, you cannot promote it to prep. I returned the hook to the nominations area for another editor to promote.

As a side note, when you do promote a hook to prep, you also need to add the credit line to the prep page (near the bottom) so the page creator will get credit for it. Yoninah (talk) 22:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Oops, thank you for fixing it! Soaper1234 - talk 06:02, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Lofty Chiltern

On 1 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lofty Chiltern, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the role of Lofty Chiltern in Casualty was specifically written for actor Lee Mead? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lofty Chiltern. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lofty Chiltern), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:33, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Babe Smith

On 6 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Babe Smith, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the billed personality of EastEnders character Babe Smith was swapped with that of Stan Carter? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Babe Smith. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Babe Smith), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mifter (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

User:ElectrodeandtheAnode/sandbox

Hi again! Just thought I would let you know that I have virtually finished the rewrite of the Casualty (series 29) article. I have expanded on the lead, finished the production and reception section and written all the summaries. I have also checked the reference section and it seems fine to me. Not sure if you want to have a final look over the article, and if you think it is good to go, then the Casualty (series 29) article can be overwritten with the updated, rewritten article. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 14:32, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: The article looks brilliant, you've done some amazing work on it! I'd say overwrite the current article and put it up for GA status. Soaper1234 - talk 14:56, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Soaper1234: Brilliant, thank you very much for your contributions to helping improve the article too. I will overwrite it now and nominate it for GA status. All the best, ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 14:57, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Babe Smith

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Babe Smith you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sagecandor -- Sagecandor (talk) 21:21, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Babe Smith

The article Babe Smith you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Babe Smith for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sagecandor -- Sagecandor (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Too Old for This Shift

On 22 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Too Old for This Shift, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Casualty producers worked with the Association of Air Ambulances for over half a year on the special episode "Too Old for This Shift"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Too Old for This Shift. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Too Old for This Shift), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

IronGargoyle (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

User:JuneGloom07/Jasmine

I do mind somewhat. It might seem silly, but I really dislike it when people edit my userspace without at least dropping me a note first, as it completely throws me off. Personally, I don't think there was a need to add the archive link right that minute, as it wasn't going anywhere (once it's archived, it's archived). But nevermind, at least you weren't that IP sock causing disruption. :) - JuneGloom07 Talk 16:22, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: My sincerest apologises, you are completely right - I should have consulted with you first. Thank you for letting me know of my error. Soaper1234 - talk 13:41, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Casualty (series 29)

On 16 July 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Casualty (series 29), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the BBC medical drama series Casualty received criticism for a series 29 episode which featured a crash that viewers believed resembled the 2014 Glasgow bin lorry crash? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Casualty (series 29). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Casualty (series 29)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

IronGargoyle (talk) 00:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Beat me to it! + Holby City query

Hello again, Soaper1234. I was actually planning to come and write on your talk page sometime in the near future wondering if you would be interested in creating an article for the episode "One" with me − however it looks like you beat me to it! I just wanted to say your user article for "One" looks incredible so far, some brilliant progress on that article, so well done. Keep it up!

On another note, I would really like it if we could get the Main Characters section sorted for Holby City articles; in my honest opinion it looks a mess. I am aware that other editors have looked at this in the past, but overall there was no action made to improve the Main Characters section. I have an idea of what to do to try and neaten up the main character section, but I thought I would come to you first and see if you had any suggestions. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 08:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi ElectrodeandtheAnode! Haha, yes it is an article I have been slowly prepping since it was announced. Thank you for your kind words - feel free to add any information you have about the episode as it would be appreciated. In response to the character sections of Holby City series article, I understand what you mean. I would love to hear your ideas about this and hopefully we can improve these articles ASAP. Also, would we have to update the character sections of all Casualty series article as well since they follow a similar pattern? Soaper1234 - talk 12:24, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think my idea is going to work as I thought it would, unless notes were incorporated into the article... I was thinking about splitting the main characters into ward sub-sections and then having the characters listed like so under their ward, but of course [a few] characters inevitably change wards throughout the duration of the series, so my suggestion to that was to put the character under the ward sub-section they were in at the start of the series, and then create notes accordingly as and when specific characters transition from one ward to another. However, I feel that may be too timely and could be quite difficult, so it might be back to the drawing board... what do you think of what I suggested, do you think it could work at all? Or would it better to look at an alternative? ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 10:49, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

I like your idea and I can envision it, although it could be timely and messy. If we start by identifing the problems with the current presentation then we could work how to fix these problems. However, another possibility is that we list them in a similar format to the one featured at EastEnders Live, leaving out job titles as they can be so easily covered in the article/list entry. I think this could possibly work, although we would have to broach the subject of change at WP:HOLBY (if anyone still reads it...) or failing that, probably Holby City (series 19). Soaper1234 - talk 12:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: Forgot to ping you! Soaper1234 - talk 12:16, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

My problem with that section is the overwhelming amount of information involved in each entry; in my opinion it makes the section feel messy, untidy and generally uneasy on the eye. I could whip up a mock of what I had in mind in my sandbox and then we can see what it looks like there. I know it might not be used, but I think it will be helpful to be able to see. I agree with the other possibility – scrapping job titles, as like you say, they are easily covered in article/list entries. Yes, we would need to approach other editors and see what their opinions are. I know JuneGloom07 did look at this issue a while ago, but I'm not sure if she ever reached a consensus with any other editors. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Please do create an example - it would be nice to see what it looks like. I definitely think scrapping job titles is the way forward and I think it would nice to see other views on the subject matter too. Soaper1234 - talk 12:44, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Character

Hi User:Soaper1234, can you add an entry for the character Rich (a source here [1]) on List of Coronation Street characters (2017) please? Because it's a character crucial to a stryline and doesn't have an entry on article.--Theo Mandela (talk) 04:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@Theo Mandela: I actually don't really get involved in the Coronation Street articles that much, but I think you could have a go at creating an entry. Never forget that is why Wikipedia editors are around - to edit ;) Soaper1234 - talk 09:39, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Just seen the new set up been done for Casualty cast, in my opinion it should be change back to what it was. Just the character and actor is bland and boring, the job role and hierarchy of characters was much more organised and effiecient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.62.159 (talk) 22:15, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, the format was changed to this version as the job description and roles were becoming very messy and they are something which should be included in the character's list entry, not the series article. Thank you for letting me know your thoughts. Soaper1234 - talk 08:55, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

User:ElectrodeandtheAnode/sandbox HolbyBlue

Hi again Soaper1234, it's me... once again!

I was wondering if, when you get a few minutes, you could possibly have a read-through and, where necessary, copyedit, the rewrite of the HolbyBlue article I have created in my sandbox? If you do read through it and think it is okay, then I will go ahead and overwrite the original article with my rewrite, before putting it up for a GAN. Don't worry if you do not have the time at the moment, I can always ask another editor if necessary. (P.S. Loving the "One" article you are working on, it is honestly looking fantastic.) All the best, ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 23:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: That would be no problem with me! When I get a chance (it should be today), I'll have a look through for you. Having read through the article's history, I would say you need to make clear when overwriting the page that you have not changed the reception section as that would not be your own work. Thank you for your kind words about the "One" draft - I was actually hoping to ask whether you would be able to write up a plot section for me after its airing? No problem if you would prefer not to though. Soaper1234 - talk 10:22, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Brilliant, thank you for that. Yeah I sure will, I'll make it clear which sections have been rewritten/copy-edited/left etc. to ensure that the alternative editor of the first article gets credit too. Of course I can write a plot section for the episode – I'm three episodes behind at the moment (next one I need to watch is "Man Up") but I should have caught up by the end of the week, I'll write a plot for the episode as soon as possible though. Thanks again for taking some time out to read the sandbox draft, I look forward to hearing what your opinion on it is. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 10:36, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: Thank you so much - I am useless at writing plots! Don't worry about getting it done quickly - I can't imagine the production section will be finished quite yet. Soaper1234 - talk 10:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

What a great article, you should be proud! My only comment is that paragraphs 2 and 3 of the lead are a bit lengthy and could be trimmed slightly. Soaper1234 - talk 11:15, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Oh wow, thank you for getting around to reading the article so quickly! That is so great to hear, thank you for your kind words. With regards to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the lead being lengthy, I will look into that now. I will probably split paragraph two down so it is less daring, and condense paragraph 3; it might be that I take one of the reviews out from that paragraph to rectify this issue. Once again, thank you very much for reading through the article for me. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 11:24, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I have split paragraph 2 and paragraph 4 (formerly paragraph 3, the reception section) has also been trimmed. Do you think it is okay now or could it do with a bit more trimming? ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 11:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: You should ask an admin to move the draft you have worked on, so you don't lose the history. - JuneGloom07 Talk 13:21, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: Thank you for letting me know that, JuneGloom07! Could I possibly ask how/where I go to do this? ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 13:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Good idea JuneGloom07. @ElectrodeandtheAnode: The second and third paragraph, I feel, would be better together but with less detail - if you get what I mean? The reception paragraph looks good though. Soaper1234 - talk 14:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

You need to track down an admin (like User:AnemoneProjectors) and ask them to perform a history merge. This is the moment where you started working on the article, so the edits you made from there will be merged with the history of the HolbyBlue article. - JuneGloom07 Talk 14:35, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Actually as ElectrodeandtheAnode is the only editor of this draft, a straight cut and paste would be fine. — anemoneprojectors 15:36, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@AnemoneProjectors: Really? I guess I like having the history of a draft all together, even if it means everyone can see the mistakes I made along the way! - JuneGloom07 Talk 20:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: Yeah because it's about attribution and there's only one editor to attribute so technically it doesn't matter if it's all done in a single edit or 20 edits. Also it's a bit more complicated merge as it's not the whole page history. — anemoneprojectors 09:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I know what you mean, Soaper1234. I've re-merged the two paragraphs and trimmed it down a little more, do you think it is okay now, or could do with being less bulkier still? Thank you for your help as well JuneGloom07, I will go to AnemoneProjectors and ask if they would perform a history merge for me when the article is ready. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 14:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: I think that looks better now - I'm sure it will do well at GAN. Soaper1234 - talk 15:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: I just noticed that the opening sentence should be "HolbyBlue (also known as Holby Blue) is a British police procedural drama series...". It hasn't stopped being a drama series just because it's no longer on the air. See MOS:TENSE. I'd also get rid of that heading at the top of the article before the move. - JuneGloom07 Talk 16:17, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Good spot @JuneGloom07:, and thank you very much for picking me up on that. I will correct the tense now, remove the header, and then move the article. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 16:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Harry

Do you think you would make a page for Harry now he has been revealed as Amy's killer?

Hi, I'm probably not the best person for creating Hollyoaks articles at the moment. However, feel free to create a Wikipedia account and begin a draft on the character yourself! Soaper1234 - talk 08:46, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Holby and Casualty "new cast format"

Hey!

I've noticed and rectifying your doings on Holby series 1-19 wiki pages, Could you please respect the way the cast format is like and not change them to your own way / change them back to the way they were? I'm changing the Holby ones back myself, but could you do me a favour and change the Casualty ones back? Thanks in Advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.253.210.31 (talk) 15:51, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, these new format changes is something I have created with the guidance of another user. It has been stated by several users on many occasions that the previous format is messy, complicated and unneccesary as the job titles etc. (which have been removed) should be in the character's article/list entry, not a series article. You may also notice that this new format is one rolled out across other television series as well. I hope you can understand why the changes have been made and please do not hesitate to respond, Soaper1234 - talk 07:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Soaper1234. You have new messages at talk:85.253.210.31.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi again, this guy - ElectrodeandtheAnode, told me to respond to you instead of doing an edit war (which for ElectrodeandtheAnode's knowledge improvment, I only did like 2 edits before my previous message to Soaper, after which I stopped) so here I am to talk. I really did not want to respond at first because it really is useless because it won't change anything so I'll be brief: I don't like the new format, in fact, hate it but won't do anything against it since last time I changed someone's edit on a wiki page (in fact I made a sentence correct) I got a death threat so I don't need any butthurt editors trying to kill me (not saying you're butthurt btw). I hope one day the format will be changed back to the better one as now my work on Holby series 1-8 has been practically undone and it feels bad. Thank you for your time.

Hi again, that's just a precaution as often with IP users, things can escalate very fast. In fact, maybe you should create yourself a Wikipedia account so your edits can be noted correctly and you can develop your edits by creating user pages, sandboxes and help to improve Wikipedia. In fact, you would also be able to sign yourself up at WP:HOLBY if you register an account at Wikipedia. I understand you are not a fan of this new format and should you feel it appropriate for a formal discussion on the topic so your views can be heard, please start a discussion at the WP:HOLBY talk page (or I could if you prefer). It is simply horrendous to have receieved such a response, but I do hope you decide to join Wikipedia. All the best, Soaper1234 - talk 16:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Kirsty Clements

On 24 September 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kirsty Clements, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in order to accurately portray her character Kirsty Clements' domestic violence storyline, actress Lucy Gaskell spoke to women affected by domestic abuse? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kirsty Clements. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kirsty Clements), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sam Nicholls.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sam Nicholls.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Plot for "One"

Hi again, Soaper1234! I just want to apologise now for taking so long to create this, but I finally have written a summary for your article, "One". I will get it added to your article by this evening. I might make a few tweaks after I have added it as I am not completely satisfied with the plot, and it is also just slightly (about 20 words) over 400 words, however after working on it and making many changes to the plot over the past month and a bit, I think it is appropriate now to be added. I am surprised myself in how difficult it was to write an extended summary for this episode! Hope you are doing well! ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 13:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi ElectrodeandtheAnode, hope you are well. Thank you so much for all your hard work on this plot; it is truly appreciated. I'm sure it will be great whatever the outcome and I wouldn't worry if it is a few words over. Again, thank you so much for everything you've done. Soaper1234 - talk 19:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Done! Oh gosh I misspelt 'Add' in my edit summary - how embarrassing - I sincerely apologise! I hope the summary is okay. Good luck with the rest of the article, it is looking incredible. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 21:00, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh haha, no worries :P. The plot looks incredible - thank you so much for all your work. Should I take the article to GAN, I will be sure to include you. For now, the next step for me is to write up a plot before moving it to mainspace. Thank you so much again :) Soaper1234 - talk 21:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey. Thank you for correcting the category and episode title errors in the episode article. I had to admit defeat this morning and put it in the main space. When I started it I expected lots of episode reviews and magazine sources. It was not to be though, it is kind of lacklustre as a result.. Rain the 1 23:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Raintheone. Glad to see you back again - hope you are keeping well. No worries about the edits on the episode article. I also thought there might be some more episode reviews if I'm honest so that was a shame. I think that despite the limited resources, you have created a neat article :) Soaper1234 - talk 10:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Casualty "specials"

Hi again, Soaper1234. So I reviewed the current List of Casualty episodes article tonight, and it came to my attention that the Specials section of the article is, quite literally, a mess. I have began creating a new version of the Special episodes table, and aim to get it overwritten on the current Specials episode table by the middle of next week. However, I have come across a "special" that I quite frankly am left querying myself about. The "Blue Peter Special" "episode" is the one I am talking about (Special 5) − I am struggling to find any source which even recognises this Casualty snippet, as I would personally refer it to, as being a notable event. What is your opinion on this "special episode"? Hope you are keeping well. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 23:03, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi ElectrodeandtheAnode. What a brilliant idea - now I'm just thinking aloud now, but do you think you have the potential to change the list into a featured list? Just a thought. Anyway, onto your issue, I personally think if you can't find a source for it, you can't include it. Soaper1234 - talk 10:55, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Potentially. However, I think it would be tricky considering that the older series articles do not have individual episode references. I do know that once an episode has aired, a reference is not actually necessary, so the no references on the older episode titles is not actually the problem, however I feel like having a few series individual episodes referenced, and others not, is going to hold us back. What are your thoughts on it? And no problem, I will leave it out, thank you! ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: Is this the ep you're talking about? [2] - JuneGloom07 Talk 18:44, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@JuneGloom07: ...indeed it is! Gosh, thank you very much for finding that, I could not, for the life of me, find a source for that episode. In that case, it may be included in the Specials table. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 20:25, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: That is a good point about old episodes, although a "cite episode" template should cover it? Like I said, I was just thinking aloud so no worries. @JuneGloom07: Once again proving to be incredible! Soaper1234 - talk 20:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Updating the List of Casualty characters?

Hi again Soaper1234. I was wondering if it might be worth starting to consider moving User:ElectrodeandtheAnode/List of Casualty characters over to the current main article? If we update the user article first, do you think it would be ready to be moved over? ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 18:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: Yes, I would say it needs an update to reflect recent events. I think we need to look into page protection before moving it over. If we still want to achieve FL status with this list, we need avoid any IP distruption so a page protection upgrade may be useful. Soaper1234 - talk 20:11, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Who should we discuss upgrading the page’s protection level with? I would quite like to see the page be upgraded to FL, so I definitely think it would be worth it. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 20:17, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

@ElectrodeandtheAnode: I'm not entirely sure if I'm honest. I'm sure there are some advice pages we could have a look on. Soaper1234 - talk 16:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I have updated the page, so now we just need to enquire about protection level. I will have a look for an advice page now and see if I can find anything. ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 16:48, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Could it be worth asking an admin what they think? ElectrodeandtheAnode (talk) 17:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

This sounds brilliant. I look forward to this page coming together. You could ask an admin :) Soaper1234 - talk 20:11, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

EastEnders storylines

Hi. I really appreciate the update you did in the lead to User:AnemoneProjectors/List of EastEnders episodes (2017). The monthly sections still need paragraphs added with their notable storylines, arrivals and departures, and I think the best thing to do is to source the notable storylines first (especially those that were announced or trailed, had a big impact or continued across multiple weeks) and then use that to update the lead section with the year's notable storylines. It's a job I fell behind, as well as updating the cast section with the cast changes. Would you be willing to help out on those bits? — anemoneprojectors 09:02, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi AnemoneProjectors, great to see you a bit more active now! Yeah, I've no problems with updating the 2017 page. I'll try to get round to it soon Soaper1234 - talk 19:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks :-) I've got a little bit of time off work and am trying to catch up on my watchlist where I can, but my laptop is so slow that I can only do a bit each day really! And then I'll be back to work again... d'oh! — anemoneprojectors 08:29, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

[[User:Soaper1234|<font color="#FF7400">'''Soaper1234'''</font>]] - <small>[[User talk:Soaper1234|<font color="#00A6FF">talk</font>]]</small>: Soaper1234 - talk

to

[[User:Soaper1234|<b style="color: #FF7400;">Soaper1234</b>]] - <small>[[User talk:Soaper1234|<span style="color: #00A6FF;">talk</span>]]</small>: Soaper1234 - talk

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 22:08, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Anomalocaris. I think that's done :) Soaper1234 - talk1 18:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 18:05, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Soaper1234. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas Soaper1234!!


Hi Soaper1234, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
   –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 15:13, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Davey2010! Soaper1234 - talk 15:27, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Belated Merry Christmas back at you and Happy New Year! Skteosk (talk) 08:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Skteosk. Soaper1234 - talk 14:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)