Talk:Val Pollard

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Television: Emmerdale Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Emmerdale task force (assessed as Low-importance). Soap Operas This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve 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.Soap OperasWikipedia:WikiProject Soap OperasTemplate:WikiProject Soap Operassoap opera articles Fictional characters This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

How exactly is Val an entrepreneur? Surely that title should be saved for people who do many different things, i.e. the Kings and De Souzas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.79.98 (talk) 09:27, 6 August 2008

I've begun a discussion regarding the atrocious state of character articles within the Emmerdale universe. These articles stand to be deleted unless corrective action is taken. Please join the conversation at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Emmerdale#Serious problems across the board; let's start with character articles. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:00, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• [1] - weddings from hellRaintheOne ^BAM 19:20, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• ReceptionRain the 1 03:09, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She is technically at the present time a past character because she is someone who was, but is not currently, a cast member. Therefore she should be recorded on Wiki as such, with her name in the returning column on the Emmerdale Cast page, as the current info released is that she is taking a 3 month break. But these announcements are never set in stone-nobody knows what will happen in the future eg Charlie Hardwick may decide she wants more time off or that she doesnt want to return at all. When the character of Doug departed, it was announced that it was temprorary too; for just a few months. However, a year on from his last appearance he still hasnt returned. So we will be following protocol as used in his and other cases, as well as commonsense and reflecting what the references tell us, by presenting her within Wikipedia as a former character who is at the moment expected to return in 3 months: simple. Nocrowx (talk) 03:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I must have missed the memo for when you were appointed as this project's leader. You seem to think it is up to you and you only to make every single decision. Making changes as you see fit, quite boldy too, ordering other editors to look at talk pages - which only your opinion is included. For here, in the above post - you make it clear of what "we will be" doing from now on and explain that any other way shall lack commonsense. This practise goes against the foundations of Wikipedia being a collaborative effort.Rain the 1 03:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The actress is on a twelve week break, she still is a cast member and she has not departed the show. Ordering editors around is not how this works, we go by consensus. If consensus is against you, then you have to deal with it and move on. - JuneGloom Talk 19:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]