From Fringepedia - The FRINGE wiki

from deleted Talk:Portal:Recurring Char...

Character

Contents 1 from deleted Talk:Portal:Recurring Char... 1.1 Character 1.2 Defining Recurring Character 1.3 Images 1.4 William Bell 1.5 Walter Bishop 1.6 Portal Colors 2 Current Talk Issues 2.1 Bell as RECUR??? 2.2 Why are Charlie and John Scott recurring? 2.3 Brandon

Is Gene really a character or is she just a breathing prop?--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 19:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Lostpedia has Vincent listed as a Supporting Character -- Dennis  Talk  Contribs  20:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

At the moment only characters played by actors credited in the opening credits (main cast and guest stars) are included in the portals, while minor characters (the ones played by actors credited as co-stars, and listed during the closing credits, as well as uncredited actors) are not included in any portal but in the list of co-stars (where they are sorted by alphabetical by actor). Every character are also listed in Category:Characters as soon as they get an article of their own.

Gene isn't included in any portal, since the "actor" isn't included in the opening credits (or credited at all, for that matter). She(/it) could however be included in the list of co-stars and the Category:Characters. Personally I think she should be included in the Category:Animals only, but that that category should be a sub-category of both Category:Items and Category:Characters, and not at all in the list of co-stars - simply because including Gene would require us to include the pigeons as well... and that feels rather silly. The character category will be crowded soon enough, anyhow, and I kinda like separating the animals.

Maybe a Portal:Animals though? --Pierre 21:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

The pigeons don't have names. They are also not recurring characters. Gene has a name, and has been in almost every episode. I'm perfectly fine with changing "the rules" to allow Gene into the recurring characters portal. If it's good enough for Lostpedia, it's good enough for Fringepedia, IMO.

You are talking about two separate things --- You can still categorize Gene however you like: Animal, Item, etc. and keep her in the Recurring Characters portal -- Dennis  Talk  Contribs  21:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

First of all - Fringepedia isn't Lostpedia. As of categorization vs portal inclusion, we greatly will gain from keeping the same guidelines. And what's your suggestion for the new "rules"? --Pierre 21:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Not yet, but maybe someday. I agree in general, but I think it's OK to make an exception in this case. As for the rule, Lostpedia has this for their Supporting Characters portal: "This is a list of important minor characters on the show." -- Dennis  Talk  Contribs  22:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

And as you probably know, that rule has caused lots of discussion as of how it is to be interpreted. Better defined guidelines (rather than "rules") will keep us from such discussions. Anyhow - any exceptions to any rules should be agreed upon before put in action, so please don't put Gene into this portal, until (if) we have agreed on such changes. (after all - this is a wiki :) )

At the moment the Portal:Guest Characters and the other character portals are synchronized with Portal:Cast and the episode articles - changing the guidelines will have effect on these articles as well. Pierre 22:10, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Obiously, Dennis has choosed to strip me of sysops right, without any warnings or explications, and without answering me on why. Hopefully he and Jim will reconsider this - expelling someone merely because of disagreement really isn't OK (and definitely not the way to begin creating a new Lostpedia). I'm quite proud of what I have accompliced on Fringepedia over the last few weeks, but if this is how its going to be, I'm off it.

Until I get some decent explanation - good bye. Honestly - I'm hurt. :( --Pierre 22:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

You are too impatient to wait for a response. You were temporarily blocked because you were engaged in an edit war with a Sysop. According to Wikipedia: "Deliberate engagement in edit warring instead of discussion is a breach of Wikiquette and may cause user blocks from editing."

Although the original change - to include Gene in the portal was made by you, not by me. I was merely restoring the portal to its original look. The discussion is if we are to change the guidelines and thus include Gene. Until such consensus is reached, she should stay off the portal. Pierre 22:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Fine. I'm sorry I blocked you. I went ahead and added Gene to the list of Characters, so there should be no problem having her in the Recurring Characters section. Thanks! -- Dennis  Talk  Contribs  23:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

We still have the same problem - with the current guidelines, Gene doesn't make the criterias of being included in this portal. And we shouldn't add her until the criterias has been modified. I'm not sure as to how to do this though...

The current criterias is that only characters played by actors credited as guest stars and with more than one appearance is to be included in this portal. Any suggestions as to guidelines that would allow us to include Gene? Pierre 23:14, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry, Gene is not a character, she's a prop - an item handled by an actor. The cow stands in a makeshift stall. She hasn't moved since the first episode when she walked down the hall to get to the lab ( and maybe to amble over and "watch" TV)--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 00:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Since the majority of active users and the current guidelines agree (albeit based on slightly different reasons) on not including Gene in the portal, I will remove her again. That does not mean that the discussion is over though; I'm not all against including her/it in the portal, as long as we know on what grounds we are doing it. :) --Pierre 00:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
  • And just to clarify: looking at the history of this portal, it shows that prior to this discussion, the silent consensus was that Gene wasn't to be included in this portal (she was excluded a month ago without any objections). This means that if anyone is of the opinion that she/it *should* be included, such a change must be proceeded with a new consensus, which is yet to be reached. :) --Pierre 00:26, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Defining Recurring Character

A "Recurring Character" is a human being who:

• Is not a "Main Character"
• Appears in more than one episode (actor credited or uncredited)

In passing, FRINGE is different from LOST in that we are sitting in urban/suburban territory inside the U.S. and new characters are introduced every week. Many of those new characters are insignificant to the broad scope of FRINGE. Many of these characters don't even need to be tracked. At best, they deserve a section on a page (including an Infobox Character). The female DEA agent sat on a bus, got killed, and lay on a slab in a morgue. Her actor got no credit and probably doesn't deserve any in these pages. "The female DEA agent -- later identified as Evelina Mendoza -- was killed on a city bus and Dunham concluded that she had been carrying a small data disk implanted under her skin." Evelina Mendoza was a red shirt; so were Christopher Penrose's victims, including Loraine Daisy Alcott.
Other characters who don't die may be equally insignificant. The FBI agents, other than those in the main cast, don't rate much, if any, space until they actually do something. We are not obligated to agree with Fox, Bad Robot, et.al., although we may have to acknowledge our differences. --Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 00:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

You make a very valid point on the differences between Fringe and Lost!

However, we do need some sort of clear definition in regards to how to treat each character. Clear definitions means easy answers means less risk of edit wars and long, tiresome, discussions. That's why I am of the opinion that we will gain enormously from agreeing with Fox regarding the status of the cast and the characters.

What isn't generally known is that its a huge difference for an actor to be credited as "starring", "guest starring" or "co-starring". It differs in salary and in prestige. The fact also remains that it is pretty big differences between the importance of a character played by a guest starring actor and a co-starring one. Looking through the credits as listed on each episode's Fringepedia article, it isn't that difficult to agree that most characters played by a "guest star" is far more important than most characters played by "co-stars" - one might come up with a couple of disagreements, but that will occur no matter how we measure the importance of a character; agreeing with Fox will spare us from endless discussions about how important a certain character is, and give us time to actually write the articles. :) --Pierre 00:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Just realized I missed your main point :) As of the moment, only recurring characters played by guest stars is included in the portal. It is quite easy to change the guidelines and to include every (non-starring) character appearing in more than one episode. As of Power Hungry this would include three characters: The Observer, Agent Rodriguez and Gene. Following Jim's suggestion, Gene would be out, given that she/it isn't human, leaving only the Observer (whose actor is a guest star) and Rodgriguez (played by a co-star). I'm not sure that I would like this (and I'm not sure I wouldn't either ;) ) Including Rodriguez isn't that big of a deal, but what is Agent #1 from Pilot or Student from The Ghost Network were to appear with one line each in another episode? Would this make them interesting enough to regard them as more prominent than, say Claus Penrose or John Mosley (which basically is what we would be saying if we put them in the recurring characters portal)? I'm yet to make up my mind on this matter, but it will deserve some thinking about before making up our minds about it :) --Pierre 01:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Images

New portrait of Nina.- Plasticity thumb|150px|left|Nina Sharp

• I like.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 19:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

William Bell

I added William Bell to recurring characters even if only seen in one episode. I believe that the numerous references to Bell in other episodes along with the fact that his voice was heard in a recent episode qualifies him as a recurring character. And of course it is practically certain that he will appear again. I will remove him from this list if you don't think it is appropriate.--Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 22:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Good reasoning. We can argue that he "appeared" in Bad Dreams as well.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 23:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Walter Bishop

Walter Bishop need to remain on the Main Characters page. If necessary, change the requirements, but don't move him again.
Yeah, you're almost certainly correct. I had moved him to other because John Noble was listed as a co-star at the beginning of Pilot. That was equally true of Mark Valley(?). Leaving him as an "other" probably works because John Scott is dead, at least for the time being.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 23:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Portal Colors

Can we do something about the neon colors? Let's try to keep with the Fringe color pallet, if possible. --Dennis 21:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I think we should also make a color for characters from an alternate dimensions, like Peter. And, if alternate dimension Charlie does become a main character (like a lot of people think he might), should we do half his box red and the other half a different color? Or have two separate boxes? Or is this a bad idea all around? J52y 05:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

• No, not bad. We'll have to kick this one around a bit.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 13:06, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
• Not worth the effort. Nothing is gained. That is what their character and episode pages will tell you, whether or not they are from the parallel uni. The colors, red for dead, and green for alive, tell you exactly that. It doesn't matter where they come from. And who the frak says Peter is from an alternate dimension? –DocH– my edits

Didn't Walter steal Peter from the alternate dimension after the Peter in this dimension died? Thats the impression I got. And right now, it doesn't seem to matter, but Kirk Acevado is still main billed, which implies he will still be on the show. One prominent theory for this is that Charlie from the alternate dimension will be a big part of the show. If this is the case, then we may need to distinguish between the two. J52y 07:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

- Walter stealing alt-Peter and/or our-Peter dying has not been confirmed on the show. I too have that impression. That doesn't make it so. This is a canon-based pedia. If/when the show tells us that is a fact, then we will add that fact to the pedia. Don't care about what contractual credits an actor has with the show either. Yes Acevedo was listed in the Scene One credits listing of 205. But character Francis was murdered (fact), buried (fact), mourned (fact). There is no Charlie Francis anymore - ergo, relegation to prominent recur status. If we see a new alt-Charlie (par-Char), then he will be elevated appropriately thru the ranks... guest character, recur, prom recur and if need be - main character. That hasn't happened yet. We don't incorporate impression, speculation, prominent theory or SWAGs into the content of the wiki until the show tells/shows us the facts of the matter. –DocH– my edits

You're right, I'm getting ahead of myself, but do you wanna make a policy for this, in case it does happen (which I think is likely). I mean, we have already seen alternate versions of Broyles and Charlie. J52y 21:49, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

---

Current Talk Issues

Bell as RECUR???

I added William Bell to recurring characters even if only seen in one episode. I believe that the numerous references to Bell in other episodes along with the fact that his voice was heard in a recent episode qualifies him as a recurring character. And of course it is practically certain that he will appear again. I will remove him from this list if you don't think it is appropriate.--Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 22:47, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

• Good reasoning. We can argue that he "appeared" in Bad Dreams as well.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 23:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• He has only OCCURred once, through end of season one. I don't think his voice on a tape counts as a first appearance. It was uncredited and could easily have been a voice imitator. I am sure he will RECUR next season, however, pedia law says he hasn't recurred as of yet. –DocH– my edits 22:13, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

- I had initially included Bell in recurring because he was referred to in many episodes and heard in one episode. The thinking was that the character William Bell is recurring even if Leonard Nimoy is not. But as I said in my initial post under the previous Recurring character page, if the rule is that the actor has to be seen then it should be removed.--Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 22:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

- Lets pull it. (Sorry, Evil Joe.) My gut tells me he'll be back, but let's play be the rules, which we admittedly wrote.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 23:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

-I added him to keep consistent with the Portal:Recurring Characters page. If we're going to remove him here, he should be removed there, or the page should be removed, as suggested. --Evil Joe 22:26, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

- Done.--Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 23:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Why are Charlie and John Scott recurring?

Shouldn't the policy be the billing that these characters get, and both of these characters got main billing, therefore, shouldn't they be considered main characters? What logic has Charlie recurring, even though he was in every episode of the series until his death, but has Nina a main character, who has missed several episodes up to this point? J52y 21:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

- We had a background discussion on this point. "Main billing" may sometimes be confusing and not related to the importance of a character in the show. So it may not be the best criteria. But then of course we are left with the task of judging who "deserves" to be called a "Main character". John Scott was relegated to recurring as he died at the beginning of season 1 and appeared only from time to time after that. He is likely gone for good now. Nina was also relegated to recurring for a while as she was absent from many episodes in season 1. However, she has played a more important role in season 2 and was brought back as a "Main character". Charlie is more complicated and actually I would have waited longer to remove him from the Main character list. He never had a very important role (but was excellent in it) but was seen in many episodes. But now he is dead. However, we may see Charlie from the other universe again. In summary there is no clear cut rule here. So other comments as to the best way to handle this are welcome.--Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 23:29, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, perhaps we can divide it as "Main", "Minor", and "Recurring". Recurring would go to characters who appear in multiple episodes but are not main billed, minor would be characters who are main billed but are clearly not as intergral or important as the main characters. I would vote that the main characters are Olivia, Peter, Walter, and Broyles, while the minor characters are Charlie, Astrid, Nina, and John. Do you think that would work, or are there too many catagories? J52y 07:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

- Too many categories. The page looks good and is functional - as is. Nina and Astrid are main. You can't tell the story without MassDyn, and Nina IS MassDyn. Same for Astrid, you can't tell the story without Walter's Lab... and she is the viewers' window into it. Broyles is the vehicle to tell the story about matters related to Fringe Division and the science team(s). Scott and Francis are not main, there stories have been told and are over. Billing is not an issue, or care for concern. The story-telling is. –DocH– my edits

- That's not necessarily the policy used on other wikis, but those are other wikis. Agree with DocH. --Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 21:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The only thing I have to argue is that I think Charlie is a main character. I personally have always felt that Charlie was as important to the show as Astrid, being Olivia's confidant and partner, its a different story being told without thier friendship (and the recent loss of such). Yes, his story is over right now, but does that mean he isn't a main character? Btw, do like that billing is irrelevant. I was used to other wikis that list characters by such, and while its more objective, its somewhat less adequate. J52y 07:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

- That's all good and fine, but Charlie added no major story-line. He was a only a centric-character when he was a victim in Unleashed. But he was only a victim in that episode... not a true "backstory" episode. We have some Olivia back-tales of Charlie... mostly after he died. He added nothing. He wasn't ESSENTIAL to the lab like Astrid, or MassDyn like Nina, or F-Division like Broyles. He was an in-between. He just coordinated tactical raids, initiated research efforts and asked the WTF - I can't believe that - questions... a decidely prominent recurring (not main) role. –DocH– my edits 08:20, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Brandon

Brandon had a more significant role than Ella, Weiss or even Jessup! Disagree with removal from this page. Recurring characters having their own page should appear on this page (since minor, background characters no longer have their own page). --Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 23:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

- I disagree. But, if you are adamant, move him back. Below is why I demoted him to "co-star" recur from "prominent" recur.

1. First let me say... he was never in the Act 1 on-screen credits like those you list. He was in the after the show bullet credits.
2. Second, while he did help solve the 'Observers thru time' question in his second episode... he was a smart-ass tech punk with 10 seconds of sassy in his first episode.
3. Third, as for Ella, lest you forget, she was a target and aggressively saved in No-Brainer, from brain rot. Sam is the mystery man that helped "Olivia get her groove back." Jessup is a team wanna-be - with special skills - across two eps. These three all get Act 1 credits too.
4. Fourth, who said "minors don't have a page"? I dropped Brandon on the List of co-stars under "recur" with all of those like him.

-- –DocH– my edits 04:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

• I agree on the credits. And I am not saying that the other characters should be removed. My point is that Brandon appears now to be the person through which Massive Dynamic is providing assistance to the team. They are now able to do that without necessarily involving Nina (but we can of course assume that she approves). He provided relevant info on the Observers. They are developing him as a funny character (a bit of a caricature) but this is an interesting approach. As for the page, compared with early episodes there are definitely less pages created for characters. Only the most relevant characters are picked. So if on top of this they appear in more than one episode... --Labgo^{Talk|Contribs} 00:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
• If we see him, and he provides significant plot again... he definitely goes back to the major recur. Right now he is more like any of the other dozen recurring tech/ND agents that have said "hey, look what I found." Does Brandon generate UAQs? Ella, Sam & Amy are all provocative and pivotal - turns in the tale surround them. They generate UAQ's. Brandon is just a guy in the lab that presents details to fill in holes in the story. Nothing in the saga pivots around him, he is a benchmark/milestone character, to get from A to Z in the story, you have to get past him.) –DocH– my edits 01:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)