Template talk:Desperate Housewives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an attempt to build consistent guidelines for articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.
NA	This page is not an article and does not require a rating.

Contents 1 Colours 2 Minor characters 3 Dots 4 Ian 5 Colours 6 Danielle 7 Housewives additions 8 Phyllis Van De Kamp added to Secondary Charecters? 9 Added Bob Hunter and Lee 10 Bring Dylan's page back 11 Housewives image 12 Which characters should be in the "Main housewives" group?

[edit] Colours

Sorry but these colours clash horribly, making it look unattractive, distracting, and difficult to read. violet/riga (t) 13:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Be Bold! Change them! If you think you know a better colour then change them, when i added the reds i was trying to get the shade from the apple in the intro (it didnt go well) but feel free to change them ;-) Matthew Fenton (contribs) 13:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Since you only just changed them and I've had nothing to do with any related articles I thought I'd give you the chance to try something different. If I were to change them it would probably be just your standard grey/light blue shading, which I can do if you'd like but isn't particularly revolutionary. violet/riga (t) 13:11, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I did the gray thing and just changed them; Template:Desperate Housewives Ok? Matthew Fenton (contribs) 13:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Or I'll let you do it as you've done a good job there. violet/riga (t) 13:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I based the colour scheame of an old nav template that has since been redesigned to use green :) Matthew Fenton (contribs) 13:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minor characters

I moved the non-starring roles to a "minor characters" section Pjär80 00:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dots

I've reverted somebody's change from pipes to dots back to pipes, dots are poor separators and render poorly. Matthew 12:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ian

Wondering about Ian. As far as I can see, he is still credited as guest star in the latest aired episode, Dress big. What's the source for him being credited as main? Pjär80 07:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Press releases credit him as guest star. Matthew 07:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colours

Sorry, but this new green template just is hideous. Anyone strongly disagree if I change it back? Pjär80 18:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Danielle

Should we really say she isn't a main character anymore? We are still early into the season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frenchy77 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The actress who plays her - Joy Lauren - isn't credited anymore, which means that she ain't a main character; thus, she belongs with other former main characters (and as such she might guest appearances in the future, just like Rex, John, Karl etc. has done in the past). Pjär80 21:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

She was credited last night (although she didnt appear). So, she is a main character. Frenchy 18:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frenchy77 (talk • contribs)

Yep - she's back in the credits, and back as a current main character in the credits. Pjär80 21:59, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Housewives additions

I was thinking that since the articles for each of the main wives are getting pretty long, it would be smart to split it up into something along the lines of, for example, "Bree Van De Kamp (season 1)" or "Bree Van De Kamp in Season 1" and then having an optional row within this template (Desperate Housewives) and it would say something like, "Part of a series on Bree Hodge" with links for each season (abbreviated of course)." Geoking66_talk 18:55, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

No! By all means no! The reason for the character articles getting too long is that the information about them is too detailed. See Wikipedia: Writing about fiction for more information. Pjär80 22:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

When you have a show with every single character having a huge contribution to an increasingly complex storyline as Desperate Housewives, detail is a necessity. No matter how much you try to simplify it, eventually the article will need to be split. Rather than taking on this task later when there's a extremely large volume of information, completing it now saves a lot of energy. Geoking66_talk 01:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:Writing about fiction, and I think you'll see my point. We have to remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a DH fan site. :) Pjär80 22:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Phyllis Van De Kamp added to Secondary Charecters?

Should she be added? I think she's quite an important charecter to be added, she was in four episodes in the second season and according to the wikipedia page on the forth episode of the fourth season, she makes an apperance in that aswell and might even appear after that episode. I think she should be added because she was an important role during the second season with the Bree/George storyline so I think she should be added. What does everyone else think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam1012233 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The general rule is that character appearing in less than 8 episodes are included in List of Desperate Housewives characters. If or when Phyllis reaches an amount of 8 appearences, then she ought to have an individual article. But please add info to her paragraph in List of Desperate Housewives characters, as it's very short at the moment. Pjär80 22:03, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that seems fair enough. Also sorry for making the Stella Wingfield page, I wasen't aware of the epight episode rule before I made the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam1012233 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hehe - nothing to be sorry for :) The more we are trying to improve the DH sites, the better they will get. Better to edit one too many, than one too few edit. Be bold, and don't be afraid to disagree with other editors. :) Pjär80 21:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I get why eight episodes is an approiate amount, but alot of charecters who have had less apperances have also been quite important to the storyline such as Phyllis, Stella and other charecters but I have to agree that Desperate Housewives has had a huge cast from main charecters, recurring charecters, etc so I think the eight episode rule is a good idea. I do think Cayolyn Brigsby should have her own page back. She played quite a major rule, fair enough she was in episode 1-7 of season 3 but she was quite an important charecter, anybody agree? Sam1012233 23:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I think "eight episodes" is a rather prosaic way to do it, and obviously, as it has been broken in the case of Gloria Hodge (and also of Travers McClain), that rule shouldn't always be adhered to. The way I see it, is that character bios should be given when the character is essential for an imporant plot point. When you read a character bio and it is mostly passive information or incidental references put together (in my opinion, those descriptions refer to Travers McClain and Ida Greenberg respectively), then perhaps it isn't such a good idea. Characters such as Carolyn Bigsby, who are far more tied up in significant events, should be included over those with simply a higher episode count.

As for current guest stars, those whose significance we can't yet fully predict, I actually think it's better for them to be added in from the start. This is apparently how the articles were controlled in Season Three, for example, with Art being added in, and then taken away (the same thing, I think, happened with Rick Colleti). My point is, browsers are most probably going to interested in guest stars whose role is important at the moment. I don't think the green light should be given only after waiting for eight episodes to pass. There is no harm, if, after the character's arc has finished, they are then removed again. Under this idea, I would include Stella Wingfield most definitely. Of course, once Lynette's cancer storyline is over, and if Stella leaves the show, her significance will soon pale (think of Susan's mother in Season One and Two).

As we are not at the end of Season Seven (if that will indeed be when the show will end), we cannot really tell who the "secondary characters" are, as we don't have the whole picture. We can surmise as we go along.

--Pob iii 13:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added Bob Hunter and Lee

I've added Bob Hunter and Lee, please do not delete there pages I've worked hard on it. And I think it's silly to delete a page and then bring it back if they do appear in more than eight episodes. So until we can no for sure please leave the pages as they are. Sam1012233 15:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bring Dylan's page back

I like the idea of cutting down charecters who are deceased for example Alma Hodge and Nora Huntington. But why has Dylan Mayfair, Parker, Preston and Porter Scavoa and Kayla Huntington been removed from main charecters? All of them are main charecters and need to be included especially Dylan who is obvisoly going to have a large role this series, also maybe Adam Mayfair could be added to the current cast along with Victor Lang and Ida Greenberg theese charecters have large roles and is stupid to cut them out. Sam10123 11:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we should add back at least starring characters such as Dylan, Caleb, Austin and Matthew. They all had/have a big impact on the story, maybe bigger than McCluskey. In the guest stars George and Ian definitely deserve their own page. Maybe Victor and Nora can have theirs too. Siemgi (talk • contribs) 00:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, theese charecters are essential. Sam10123 11:50, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Read the deletion discussion for all those characters, the outcome of which was to redirect them all to the character list article. As important as some of these characters are to the storyline, they need to have real-world context to deserve their own pages, and none of them do. The articles were nothing more than plot summary, which fails WP:WAF and WP:FICT. The same plot summaries exist in the episode articles, so additionally, the character articles were also redundant. --CrazyLegsKC 04:51, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

So. On Google, Autin McCann, Ian Hainsworth, George Williams and Felicia Tilman have millions of answers. All 4 of them had promo photoshoots and a big importance to the plot. Dylan, Caleb and Matthew all are/were big parts of their season's mystery and had/have people talking about them for the whole season. Heck, there even was that Caleb actor controversy. While I agree that Nora, Victor, Martha, Carolyn, Alma, Gloria, Bob and Lee are nothing more than notable guests, they still had quite important storylines so I have mixed feeling about them. However I agree about the fact that Kayla, Porter, Preston and Ida are not notable/important enough to have their own article. Parker is slightly more important so maybe he does...

I think that's one silly rule to be honest. 172.159.78.7 17:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I am very annoyed! Dylan should have her own page! She is a season regular! She's been SO important to the storyline of this series so far and she's likely to last for a long time and she apperared on the same episode that Katherine apperared in so she has the right to have her page back like Katherine does. I see why Ida, Parker, Porter, Kayla and Preston don't have their own pages as they don't contribute much to the story but Dylan however, does. Sam10123 16:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Housewives image

The image has to go. You cannot have a copyrighted image in the banner, it clearly fails WP:FU.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

• I just posted a question related to this at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --CapitalR (talk) 10:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Which characters should be in the "Main housewives" group?

OK let's discuss it. I think under this group should be only the 4 main characters. Any other opinions? -- 22:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It depends on the character of Edie really departing or staying in season 5. If she stays, she should be in the group of main housewives. Lots of promo images feature her, and Nicolette has been along the other four main cast members in award ceremonies and stuff. Just go to Google Images and look for Desperate Housewives images and you will find that most of them include Edie with the other 4. --Lord Opeth (talk) 01:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to add that I think that Katherine and Mary Alice Young should not be added in the main group. Their case is not the same as Edie's. They should be included only as "other main characters".--Lord Opeth (talk) 01:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Edie shouldn't be in the group of the main housewives. Whether she appears in promo images or not, Edie has never had a storyline that wasn't merely a support to one of the REAL main Housewives. Even when Bree was gone in season 3, her role was mostly to set up Gabby's plotlines. It should be Susan, Bree, Gabrielle, and Lynette. If Katherine becomes a real main Housewife in the fifth season, that can be discussed then. RosaAquafire (talk) 19:59, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Love the new set-up for this -- I think it should be left this way. RosaAquafire 20:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)