Talk:General Hospital/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 1 | Archive 2

Speculation on actors

Actors who have participated in taping but not aired aren't current cast members. They will be when they get aired. What if someone important in the plot dies? How can one be sure the previously taped episodes won't be revised or re-recorded? The same priniciple applies for actors that are leaving. Perhaps something could happen that would postpone the leaving of the character for another month. S/he would still exist, but not be shown. Encyclopedias contain facts, not speculation. --jag123 08:32, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User et al does not seem to understand the basics of Wikipedia. This user refuses to particpate in this discussion, and continues to post rumors and speculation in to a Wikipedia article. If this users wish to run a clearinghouse for General Hospital cast changes and rumors, I might suggest the user start a website to do so. Putting unconfirmed speculation in an article, and not even sourcing that speculation is not within the bounds of the Wiki charge. Boisemedia 06:52, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

See User:B-Movie Bandit and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Soap Operas. Mike H 06:52, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)
Regaurding the "Comings and Goings" --- I think the central idea here is that just because a soap magazine says it, doesn't meant that it will happen. Quoting above: "Perhaps something could happen that would postpone the leaving of the character for another month. S/he would still exist, but not be shown. Encyclopedias contain facts, not speculation." Also, putting an actor in a seperate category is misleading -- the person is still a member of the cast -- but they aren't included as such. Boisemedia 03:11, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
Soap opera magazines usually identiy what are rumors and what is fact. If someone on a message board says that "sources" tell them an actor is leaving, that may be suspect, but when a soap opera magazine says it, they are right about 99% of the time. They are not speculating. They are generally stating a fact. Even if the loss was postponed for a month, they are still leaving the show. And if someone is no longer on the show, it doesn't matter if their character still exists - they are not being paid by the show, they are no longer a cast member. If they are on recurring I would list them as such. Grabow is not being moved to recurring. She is being written out. Laura Spencer is still mentioned and she has not been on the show in over 3 years - I hope that doesn't mean you are going to list Genie Francis as a cast member. There is nothing misleading about putting an actor in a category that says they are leaving. They are still listed as a cast member for the time they remain on the show, the only difference is the new listing that they are leaving the show. If I wanted to remove someone as a cast member I would take them off the page entirely.

I would like to hear some thoughts on this from people besides myself and Boisemedia, because listing actors who are leaving or joining the cast is standard for most of the other soap pages, and no one else seems to have a problem with this.

If this turns out not to be the case, or if ABC changes their mind and rehires Grabow (as happens occasionally, like with Robin Mattson on AMC 10 years ago) then that information can be updated. Hirings and firings on soaps are very fluid, so this is probably going to be an ever-changing section. As an interactive site, this will never simply be as textbook and rigid as an encyclopedia. --JamesB3 03:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I guess you miss my central point. Grabow is still, right now, a cast member. REMOVING her from the cast section to put it in a separate category doesn't make any sense. Perhaps a second listing would be appropriate -- but yanking her from the list of current actors is not accurate. Also, since I'm from the world of journalism -- I think any such entry should be sourced in some way (and this is certainly within Wikipedia's guidelines). While you, James, are listing something based on information from a "news" organization, the B Movie Bandit likes to throw stuff up there that he/she read on a message board -- leaving it's validity often in question. Boisemedia 20:54, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
I understand your point, Boisemedia, I guess I just do not see moving her to a section on the same page as REMOVING her. I am not saying she is no longer on the show. I am saying that she is on her way out of the show. The information is going to be removed when she is off the show period. As of now she is being moved to a space that is only slightly below the cast list. I think that the mention in Soap Opera Weekly is enough of a "source", and I guess I just don't see this as a major violation of journalistic integrity. I see the "comings and goings" section as an area specifically for people who are leaving the show or joining the show, as a way to tip fans off about what is going on. I don't think that is inaccurate. If I wanted to be inaccurate I would remove their names entirely.

I haven't seen anyone committing any major abuses to the GH cast list, at least not recently. If they did then I would agree with you that these types of things should be stopped.

As for "news" sources, the soap opera magazines are right most of the time and they are the only real resource for final confirmation of actor hirings and firings. Many of the spoilers on the Internet are true, but of course some are not.

If you wish I will refrain from putting any other actors in that area, at least until a few more people give their opinions on the matter (if they have opinions).--JamesB3 00:59, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

POV and cast

The "POV" that was removed (about fans being tired of the Carly/Sonny/Jason/Courtney airtime) is something that has been much-discussed among fans. The original wording may have been a little strong but I think it should have been rewritten, not removed outright. These characters, and the fan reaction to them, has been a major part of GH the past five or six years.

Most of the other pages for current soaps have a section which mentions which actors are arriving and which are leaving. Someone took it out of GH with no explanation, so I restored it. --JamesB3 03:13, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Charlotte Reese Roberts

Reese Marshall was born Charlotte Reese Roberts so I believe it should be mention in the cast maybe like this Charlotte Reese Roberts/ Reese Marshall or maybe (Charlotte) Reese Roberts Marshall or (Charlotte) Reese Marshall or Charlotte Reese Roberts aka Reese Marshall or Charlotte Reese Roberts Evans Marshall or something that says who she really is.--Shimonnyman 09:03, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Caroline Benson/Carly Roberts ..... Alcazar

is it indeed known who is replacing Jennifer Bransford last I heard it was still secret. Also how can both people Laura Wright and Tamara Braun be going to replace her? Should the article be listing straight rumours as fact. Also how come in some places she is Carly Benson and others Carly Quatermaine Corinthos Alcazar. Also to be true was she really ever Carly Benson? Shouldnt she be listed as Caroline Benson AKA Carly Roberts Quartermaine Corinthos Alcazar? Just little technical obervations/should we jump the gun questions --Shimonnyman 07:09, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I've said it before -- and I'll say it again... a cast member should remain in the "cast list" until they don't appear anymore. Putting them in a seperate section is not precise -- it makes it appear as though they aren't members of the cast anymore. Boisemedia 01:21, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm not denying that, I quite agree my question is more why are we listing the other people (especialy without conformation) and why is she listed as Carly Benson? and notCaroline Benson AKA Carly Roberts Quartermaine Corinthos Alcazar no matter who we credit as the actress, who right now is Jennifer Bransford until otherwise shown in the seiries... --Shimonnyman 02:29, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

coming and going cast

Is this section even appropriate as it is never gaurenteed for anything to happen until it is aired? ABC can suddenly renegotiate contracts at a level that will alter past storylines that havnt aired yet and changing what scenes they show or don't show at whims beyond our comprehension. Also in the case of Laura Wright they can always go nevermind we dont like you and cancel there contract with her before they even air a single eppisode and could theorecticly renegotiate with Jennifer Bransford. Although I highly doubt this would happen it is always possible. Of course it is more likley with actors they havnt replaced but it has happened before and it can happen again and because this information has not yet aired it is not yet true. And also is it encyclopediatic to put things in the future as definitive?--Shimonnyman 20:38, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I don't know how any of this is possible. They fired Bransford and it's very unlikely they would change their minds. If they did, then all we would have to do is change the page to reflect that. I haven't seen a lot of information put on here that turned out to be inaccurate. --JamesB3 02:41, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
All I'm saying is the future isnt definative. I'm quite sure they wont take Bransford back too cuz it was there decision however what about when its the actor if they really want them sometimes they wait till the very last minute before pleaing. Also whose to say it wont be. I'm sorry Laura (Wright) but things aint working before its even aired and so hey retroactivly cut her or maybe like Kari Wuhrer will resign inspite of initialy chosing not too.. just saying we don't know the future --Shimonnyman 08:33, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
No, the future isn't definitive. Neither is Wikipedia. If something changes, then it can be edited again. Most of the time, over 97% of the time, when someone is hired or fired for a soap, that sticks for at least a few months. Maybe Laura will be fired after a month. Maybe she will be kidnapped by aliens. If she is, then we can say she's going. If we keep everything on hold because of what might happen, nothing would ever be updated. I can see what you're saying, I just think that if this comes up, we can simply edit the page again. We are documenting a current event, and currently, the casting changes are taking place. --JamesB3 11:05, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Character Names

I don't understand what is going on with charecter names there are some I dont Agree with as from watching the show and the shows official webpage's charecter bios here:

I believe Skye should be Quartermaine and Diego and Carly should be Alcazar (this is what they all have been going by and is what the formentioned website says they are called. (Carly maybe not as her latest insanity who knows whats going to happen.... but last I heard when someone used her name she would say its Alcazar.)

Also with Kristina.. I don't remember them changing her name but I might have missed that but the website lists Alexis Davis Lansings Daughter as Kristina Davis--Shimonnyman 04:10, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

When in doubt, it would make sense (to me, at least) to follow the episode's ending credits, since they're more up-to-date than even the website, which sometimes isn't updated for months at a time. -- D'Amico 00:10, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
You can read them? They shrink and distort them so much that I find it 100% impossible and when I can read them they are incomplete and dont show the cast... Shimonnyman 09:58, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I've spent a lot of years working with soap-related stuff -- I stare at the screen until they're clear. The interesting thing is that two of those characters have had their names listed on-air -- Skye is officially Skye Chandler, and Kristina is officially Kristina Adela Corinthos Davis. Even GH can't get their names right half the time. I figure there are three sources (in order) -- what is stated on-air as a legal name, what is listed in the end credits (they mis-spell Courtney's name -- she's listed as Courtney Jax when it should be Courtney Jacks), and as a last ditch effort, what is listed on the website. The website is the least accurate, IMHO, because it's made up by a group of techies. The site can't even agree on names (some places list Kristina Ashton Davis, some list Kristina Adella Corinthos Davis, some list Kristina Corinthos-Davis, etc -- same with Michael). You'd think someone would be checking that information. is usually a good source where names are concerned because they'll list the various names characters have had and note whichever one is official. ... D'Amico 12:42, 28 November 2005

Move the Article Back

I see no need for a disambig page. The US GH is much better known both in the US and in the UK. Juppiter 18:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Moved back. Jcuk, DO NOT move the page back without a discussion at Requested Moves. Mike H. That's hot 14:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Naming Guidelines and General concensus

There seems to be no standards as to how the charecters are being named in here first thing its leagal names then it's what they go by then it's in the credits then its whatever we feel like then it's what they go by then credits leagal names just whatever we feel like we need a general concences and it needs to be standard for every charecter in the entire show.