Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wikipedia
NBC > Daytime > Days of our Lives > Love in the Afternoon > John & Marlena
New_Days_Fan
I know it isnt a very reliable source for research papers and stuff, but I always found it useful when I wanted to know something about a Days character.

Well, today, I went on there and looked up Marlena. Well, they have a fairly extensive history of her on there. It is up to date. All the to when she and John left for Switzerland.

Then, I went to John's page, and practically nothing. Now I've been there before, and it had tons of information on it. I know pretty much anyone can edit those pages. But why would they delete all of the information?
Soozn79
QUOTE (New_Days_Fan @ Feb 9 2009, 09:45 PM) *
I know it isnt a very reliable source for research papers and stuff, but I always found it useful when I wanted to know something about a Days character.

Well, today, I went on there and looked up Marlena. Well, they have a fairly extensive history of her on there. It is up to date. All the to when she and John left for Switzerland.

Then, I went to John's page, and practically nothing. Now I've been there before, and it had tons of information on it. I know pretty much anyone can edit those pages. But why would they delete all of the information?

Wow! What on earth??
mouse57
can you post a link? please wink.gif

I don't remember if John had a lot of info under his or not. I know Marlena had a lot.
New_Days_Fan
QUOTE (mouse57 @ Feb 11 2009, 08:58 AM) *
can you post a link? please wink.gif

I don't remember if John had a lot of info under his or not. I know Marlena had a lot.


I certainly remember there being a lot more than this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Black_(fiction)
New_Days_Fan
I did notice they updated the side. I never knew they officially gave him a birth year though. According to that site, it's 1953.

I find it odd that Marlena's birth year says 1951, because I thought they celebrated her 50th birthday not that long ago. And that would make her 58. John would also be 56. Neither one really makes sense. Since Roman's was changed from 1950 to 1954 and Steve's is 1950. When they showed Steve's tombstone in 2006 and it said he was older than Marlena, I couldn't believe it. You'd think it'd be Roman, Marlena, John and then Steve. Not Steve, Marlena, John, and then Roman. Steve can't be THAT much older than Kayla.

I reraise the logic I used before!
QUOTE (NewDaysFan @ Sep 23 2008, 02:06 PM) *
And how the hell is Steve older than Marlena!?

According to the stories(funerals and such), Steve is 53 and Marlena is 52. Also, originally Roman was supposed to be 58, but they rewrote him to be 54.

And im not believing that Roman is only one year older than Steve or that Steve is older than Marlena. Bo and Steve should be around the same age, and Bo is the youngest of the Brady's(besides Frankie and Max). In 1984, Hope was 18, which would make her 42. Bo is only supposed to be a few years older than Hope. So he would be in his forties. So if Hope is 42, Bo is something like 45, Marlena is 52, Roman is 54, Kim was younger than Roman, and Kayla who was younger than her should be around 47-48, then Steve should be closer to 47!


Not sure where I got the conflicting data about Marlena's age though. I think 52 was my number.
mouse57
QUOTE (New_Days_Fan @ Feb 11 2009, 11:26 PM) *
I certainly remember there being a lot more than this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Black_(fiction)


thanks.

there isn't much on his page at all. I'm glad they have a couple page wub.gif
Hartleyfan
Wikipedia isn't all that accurate.
New_Days_Fan
QUOTE (Hartleyfan @ Feb 12 2009, 06:41 PM) *
Wikipedia isn't all that accurate.


I know that. But their character information is usually correct.
New_Days_Fan
Apparently Wikipedia raised their standards or something. There is now a brief 4 paragraph history on the character and a note at the top which states:

QUOTE
The plot summary in this article is too long or detailed compared to the rest of the content. Please edit the article to focus on discussing the work rather than merely reiterating the plot. (March 2009)


I guess it was far too detailed for them, so they removed it.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.