Talk:Roxy Mitchell/Archive 1

Archive 1

Parents

The Radio Times says that their parents are Archie and Glenda Mitchell, Archie being Eric's brother. So it seems we were wrong to assume their father was Clive, previously mentioned as Eric's other brother. However, (the esteemed publication) Soaplife stated that Clive was their father - but I swear they get most of their information from here and the Digital Spy forums anyway, so Radio Times are probably right! Any comments? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 09:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

See my reply on Talk:Ronnie Mitchell. — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 20:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

They did introduce themselves as Archie's daughters to Peggy in their first appearance. AiselneDrossel 09:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Present Tense

Some of this article is written in the future tense, as Roxy is now on the square this information may need revising. AiselneDrossel 12:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Engaged/Single

Article says single, info box says engaged. Which is it? JimmyMac82 18:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

She is engaged, but early reports said both sisters were single. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 23:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge

I suggest merging this page with the Ronnie Mitchell page as the two characters do everything together so there's not much point in having two different pages describing them seperately. It would be a bit like having two seperate pages for Pinky and Brain.

No. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

They don't do everything together anyway. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 18:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Roxie mitchell.jpg

Image:Roxie mitchell.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Sources

• [1] -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Extensions

Does the actress wear hair extensions for the role? CandiceWalsh (talk) 20:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Mitchell/Slater & her scar

She's still married to Sean, so why's this been moved back?

Also, we ought to say something about the origin of Rita's scar and how it was incorporated into an actual storyline. ^anemone│_projectors 23:06, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

when roxy's fiance died she forgot about it moved on with her life and didnt think about it much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.22.109.213 (talk • contribs)

Thanks but I figured that out in the last 6 months. But Sean never died. And using Mitchell for the article title even though legally (unless she changed it off-screen) she's still Slater is correct because of WP:COMMONNAME. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Paul O'Grady interview

I've just watched Rita Simons on the Paul O'Grady Show and she actually had some good stuff to say. Did anyone else see it? Would be good if we could use some of it here. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Last Night's ep??

Did anyone see it??, as I'm really confused When Roxy went to the bank she went to withdraw £500, however it was declined she then withdrew a statement and it said Balance was £0.98, now could someone please tell me something how on god's name has she got through £3 million in 8/9 months I mean is she still a businesswoman or is she bankrupt I'm totally confused.com –TheBubler2010 (talk) 14:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

This isn't a forum. Try Digital Spy or something. AnemoneProjectors 14:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Sources 2

[2] - Roxy's never been a great judge of character.RAIN*the*ONE ^BAM 23:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

• Rita Simons Interview - Part Two I added part one but didn't get around to reading part two yet. –AnemoneProjectors– 10:28, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Is she still married to Sean?

Just wondered this for a while, is she still married to Sean? I do remember mentions of her being divorced/separated whatever in around 2009/2010 when she was dating Michael Moon as they talked of an engagement - but it would be good to know as their marriage only lasted four/five months. Alex250P (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't recall ever hearing about her being divorced, but being separated doesn't make them divorced. I can't see that they would be still married, but nobody has heard from Sean or knows where he is, so Roxy probably wouldn't have been able to contact him to get a divorce. She wouldn't have been able to apply for a divorce until a year of marriage per English law, and her grounds would probably be desertion, meaning he'd have to be gone for two years out of two and a half, so she could not have got divorced before 2010. But still, it hasn't been mentioned, or we'd have put it in here straight away. Personally, I can't see them still being married - but the writers tend to make stuff up as they go along sometimes, like unseen divorces and unreferenced name changes in the credits. –AnemoneProjectors– 13:25, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 October 2012

Could you change the "-" in the occupation field in the infobox to an mdash; please --195.194.238.104 (talk) 14:12, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually, per MOS:DASH those should all be en dashes. I have Done accordingly and also removed the stray em dash after "businesswoman". —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:34, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

New picture, please!

Can a new picture be uploaded? This one is very old! — M.Mario (T/C) 21:25, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Roxy and Alfie's annulment

Roxy applied for the annulment (we know this because she had to pay the £410). We know she filled the forms out. Then she has to send them to divorce court. We don't know if she did yet, but she probably did. Alfie had 8 days to respond. We don't know if he did but he probably did. Roxy then applies for a decree nisi. Once she gets the decree nisi, she has to wait 6 weeks to apply for a decree absolute or "decree of nullity". Only when she receives the decree absolute is the marriage finally annulled (and that takes a while longer). Therefore, Roxy and Alfie cannot be annulled before 2014. –AnemoneProjectors– 10:29, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

For anyone who might dispute this, this information was taken from the UK government's website, and is therefore accurate. –AnemoneProjectors– 09:57, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Surely you are not suggesting that we apply real laws to a fictional TV show? Flat Out let's discuss it 00:01, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Surely Public service broadcasting — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 09:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

So when do we actually find out when it's annulled? Eastendersfan2006 (talk) 23:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear EastEnders Fan, It will come up sooner or later; we just have to be patient; there will be a development in the story which will necessitate referring to the subject. Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 23:41, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I have again reverted an edit which places an end date without a reliable source. Flat Out let's discuss it 03:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

It's now been more than 6 months, I think, with no mention. Soaps don't always mention these things when they're finalised, just when they want to file for a divorce or annulment. I think Alfie and Roxy are probably no longer married. However, there's stuff coming up with Alfie and Roxy, so we could see what comes out. –AnemoneProjectors– 11:21, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

I propose that “2013-?” be changed to “2013-14”? Roxy applied began proceedings for an annulment in December 2013, and in real life an annulment, like a divorce, would take roughly three to four months from start to finish. Alfie was also free to marry Kat in October 2014. It is crystal clear that Alfie and Roxy's marriage must have been annulled in 2014. The use of the question mark is amateurish and excessively pedantic. Vabadus91 (talk) 01:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Nope. Classed as original research. Please read Wikipedia's policies. Thanks.--5 albert square (talk) 19:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

It can't have been anything other than 2014 though? –AnemoneProjectors– 14:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

'Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist. This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources.'

The published source for the fact that Alfie and Roxy's marriage was annulled in 2014 is the fact that the annulment process began in late 2013 according to one of the show's broadcast episodes, could only have been completed in 2014 based on the information in that episode, and that Alfie was free in 2014 to marry Kat. The question mark looks untidy and silly given this knowledge. Few divorces in soaps are directly referred to by explicit statements from characters that a decree absolute has been pronounced. 'Pedantic' isn't even the right word for this level of fussiness.

Vabadus91 (talk) 01:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

The use of the two question marks

My point is based on the fact that we cannot ask our readers to consider a question; our job is to give facts that can be verified.
If a question mark is added to copy it is asking a question which the reader has to consider. This is not in accordance with an encyclopaedia.
The issue on this article revolves around the termination of two marriages.
If divorce has not been mentioned, who are you to assume the annulment?
Yes, it would have been illegal, but she would not be the first or last person to make a false declaration to the registrar. We cannot assume anything here. We just state what is in the series.
I am told that question marks have been added because, without them, it gives the impression that Roxy is bigamously married to Alfie and Sean. To that I replied, "And who are you to state that she is NOT?"
I received a reply, "The question marks indicate that we do not know whether the marriage was dissolved or not. You are assuming it never was, your word is not law."
To which I replied, "I am not "assuming"" anything. The fact is we have no evidence, therefore we cannot state anything. As I said earlier, she may have made false declarations to the registrar."
We cannot assume to know an end date. We cannot suggest an end to a marriage by using question marks. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 00:59, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you - I think we're both after the same principle, but at opposite ends of the scale. You've stated that as an article that should provide facts we therefore can not leave it ambiguous for readers. However, when it is apparent that a marriage has ended but not clear when, questions have been used on these articles for years and years. It HAS been stated that Roxy and Sean have separated, and yes by leaving it open-ended it does look as if she is bigamous. But you're saying we should not include a question mark due to not being certain about their divorce/annulment/separation but then there is nov verification that they ARE still married - so technically, if we're not meant to suggest anything - what are we meant to say? We both have no reference fact to suggest, but your suggestion makes it very confusing. Soaps will not always mention the precise date of a divorce, why should suggest that nobody divorces before re-marrying? If that was the case then wouldn't most soap characters technically be bigamous? Alex250P (talk) 22:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Exactly. Especially seeing as Roxy and Alfie both filed for an annulment in November. It is now April. Their marriage has been annulled. Personally, I think we should say that their marriage ended in 2013 because they would have recieved their decree nisi by then. Also, Sean is no longer married to Roxy and there is a law that states that if a spouse has not seen or had any contact from their spouse for 2 years

then they can automatically divorce. That would apply to Sean and Roxy. We use estimates for Janine and Ryan and for Bianca and Ricky. Something are based on common sense.--AngieWattsFan (talk) 00:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Alex for your courteous reply. I regret what materialised last night and would prefer to dismiss it as just our being over-zealous on a very minor point. I am sure we can work together for the benefit of the EastEnders project, as already demonstrated just recently on the "actual age" matter. I wish you all the best. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 23:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm just wondering where it was said that their marriage has ended (indicated by the question mark). As far as we know, the two are still married so the question mark shouldn't be there at all because it says to people the marriage ended and we don't know when, rather then the two are still married (at least in my opinion). Also, how come we assumed that Janine and Ryan's marriage ended in 2012 (the year he left the show) but we can't assume the same for Sean and Roxy? That point always confused me a bit. Arjoccolenty (talk) 16:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

About Roxy and Sean

I don't know when the exact date they got married was, but is it possible that she and Sean could have gotten an annulment based on fraud? (Her lying about him being Amy's father). Arjoccolenty (talk) 23:55, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

No. That's unrelated but why does it say that Sean is married to Roxy on his page. They were divorced at least 2 years after he was last seen. That's the law - automatic divorce.--Kathybealefan (talk) 21:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)(sock comment striken--Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 20:09, 2 May 2014 (UTC))

I don't know when they were divorced, but they are divorced. I doubt Roxy committed bigamy with Alfie. Arjoccolenty (talk) 03:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

We only deal with what reliable sources have to say, and we dont apply real-world law to what happens on a fictional program. Flat Out let's discuss it 03:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

But aren't you contradicting yourself Flat Out? As if we don't apply real world laws to a fictional program, then surely we are supposed to believe Alfie and Roxy are divorced, and it's unlikely they will share any further scene. Eastendersfan2006 (talk) 23:46, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

"We dont apply real-world law to what happens on a fictional program" - but we have nothing else to go on as divorces are only usually mentioned when proceedings start, or maybe when a decree nisi arrives. British soaps do occasionally try to reflect real life. Roxy and Alfie will be sharing scenes soon. –AnemoneProjectors– 11:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

“That's the law - automatic divorce.” — There is no such thing as ‘automatic divorce’ in law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vabadus91 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

October 2014

The reason why I changed the date to 13 because thats what the family page says so I changed it so it ties up hope you don't mind thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dazza20006 (talk • contribs) 04:45, 13 October 2014 (UTC)