Welcome! Edit

Hello and welcome to the Downton Abbey Wiki, Ehj666! Thanks for your edit to the File:EdithLetter.png page.

If you're new to wikia or just new to Downton Abbey Wiki, you might want to check out some of these links.

Not sure where to start?

Adding content:

  • Check out the list of Wanted Pages to see what pages are linked to but do not yet exist.
  • Want to help editing pages we're stuck on? See a full list of stubs here.
  • Before creating a new page, check to see if the same page with a slightly different spelling or title exists.
  • When editing on a page make sure there are links on the page, otherwise it's a Deadend Page.
  • Make sure other pages link to the page you're editing otherwise it's a Lonely Page.

I'm really happy to have you here, and look forward to working with you! Please leave me a message on my talk page if I can help with anything. Amateur Obsessive (talk) 04:34, October 28, 2013 (UTC)


Sorry about the message I just left (and removed) it was intended for someone else. --Amateur Obsessive (talk) 08:15, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

Have you thought . . .Edit

About perhaps putting yourself forwards as a candidate for adminship? I'd back you as I think you're knowledgeable about the subject, seem dedicated to the wiki and are helping to keep the wiki up to date and organised. I ask because I'm not as active as I used to be and the wiki could perhaps do with a more active admin. Anyway, if you are interested you can make a post putting your self forwards here: Forum:Adminship. --Amateur Obsessive (talk) 15:07, January 23, 2014 (UTC)

Timeline and Episode 4.08Edit

Gotcha. Can you move it into the required section for me as I am at work and on my mobile. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 11:31, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

Gotcha. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 13:20, April 13, 2014 (UTC)

Your opinion is requestedEdit

I have made a post in the forum; can you give your thoughts to my post?--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:12, December 1, 2014 (UTC)


I think you should apply for adminship. You seem like a great editor and could make a good admin. Also the admins aren't so active right now so perhaps you should send a request?TimeShade 21:37, December 29, 2014 (UTC)

I like to contribute, not so keen on being a policeman, which is why I have not applied. Ehj666 (talk) 03:36, December 30, 2014 (UTC)ehj666

Really it'll just make cleaning up easier and this wiki defs needs an active admin.TimeShade 04:11, December 30, 2014 (UTC)

Re: ReferenceEdit

Hello. I think I added 1927 to the 2015 CS (I didn't add 1926), due to the Series 6 page saying that S6 takes place from 1925-27. I apologize if I am wrong. --RotomicAcid: Remember, we are the Edwardians 01:21, September 15, 2015 (UTC)

Would you like rollback rights? Edit

Not sure you fight much spam and vandalism, but would you like 'rollback' rights? If you would, please leave a message on my talk page and I'll ask Amateur Obsessive if it is okay. I also asked RotomicAcid. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 23 Sep 2015 8:50 AM Pacific

I just noticed you have poweruser, so I'm not sure you need rollback. I have no idea what poweruser can do. LOL. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 23 Sep 2015 9:06 AM Pacific
Okay I found out that sadly, 'poweruser' doesn't really give you any abilities or rights. So if you want 'rollback' rights, please leave a message on my talk page. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 23 Sep 2015 1:48 PM Pacific
It looks like all rollback rights do is to make "undo"s a little easier. The more time consuming part is repairing sloppy edits rather than undoing either wrong information or vandalism. I think I have done more of that than simple undos. If the powers that be wish to grant me rollback rights, that is fine, but am not at all inconvenienced without them. -- Ehj666 (talk) 23:24, September 23, 2015 (UTC)ehj666
True, rollback rights aren't a super power, but many vandals are obvious. Hopefully you find the extra ability helpful. You should see a '[rollback]' link in RecentChanges. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 27 Sep 2015 9:26 AM Pacific
After using it once, I am not real fond of rollback because it does not seem to let me leave a reason. Even in the case of vandalism I like to let the admins know so that they can take action, such as blocking the user or IP address. -- Ehj666 (talk) 15:18, September 28, 2015 (UTC)ehj666
FYI, Downton Abbey Wiki:Problem users. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 28 Sep 2015 6:40 PM Pacific


Hi. I have no idea if you're here right now, but can you come into the chat? I have a reference I need to discuss with you.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:59, September 23, 2015 (UTC)

I just pulled it up, but do not see anyone there. I have not used it before.-- Ehj666 (talk) 23:25, September 23, 2015 (UTC)ehj666

Start Date of Episode 6.01Edit

Roger. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 05:34, September 25, 2015 (UTC)

Just to add more confusion to the 5.01 start date, the pig man mentioned the show was at Christmas... making 5.01 set in late 1925.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:21, October 1, 2015 (UTC)
He said it is usually held before Christmas, but does not say how much after Christmas it is this time. -- Ehj666 (talk) 01:04, October 1, 2015 (UTC)

Re: Peter CoyleEdit

Yes, I think I heard differently, but I'll rewatch that scene just to make sure. --RotomicAcid: Remember, we are the Edwardians 13:03, October 12, 2015 (UTC)

Sergeant Willis says that two women have BECOME prostitutes since Peter Coyle used them. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 13:25, October 12, 2015 (UTC)
As I learned as I rewatched that scene. --RotomicAcid: Remember, we are the Edwardians 13:42, October 12, 2015 (UTC)
Good. :D --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 13:45, October 12, 2015 (UTC)

Queen MaryEdit

How do we know it's Mary I or Mary of Scots. Tom could mean Queen Mary, wife of George V. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 12:11, October 19, 2015 (UTC)

I eliminated her from the context. Tom is clearly referring to a ruling Queen, Mary of Teck is Queen Consort, so while holding the title, does not hold the power. If it bothers you, you could add a note to that effect. -- Ehj666 (talk) 12:36, October 19, 2015 (UTC)

Nah, it doesn't bother me - I was just wondering, tis all. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 15:40, October 19, 2015 (UTC)

RE:Spelling of TiaaEdit

So it does! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 15:45, November 2, 2015 (UTC)

HEEEEEEEEEEEELP!Edit --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 16:20, November 2, 2015 (UTC)

I come to you about this, yes?Edit --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:19, November 3, 2015 (UTC)

Right - I'll inform Fandyllic or Obssessive in the morning! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:10, November 3, 2015 (UTC)


I have tried to fix it -- and it's making me angry now, as I have done it exactly like the OTHER reference like that on the page -- but can you fix the reference for Atticus and Shrimpie on the 2015 Christmas Special page? If I keep going I'm going to end up throwing something. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 20:47, November 13, 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 21:15, November 13, 2015 (UTC)

I wondered if you'd notice. I admit, I was waiting to see how long it would take you! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 21:20, November 13, 2015 (UTC)

2015 Christmas Special - can you fix the links for 5, 6 and 7? I did try and make them all work like the other references but it didn't -- and it should as I did them exactly like the other ones on the page! -- and it made me angry -- so angry in fact that I rewrote this as the original was full of nothing but swearing -- so I made the links all separate even though they're the same. Daisy, Andy and Mr Mason all need to be added to it as well as they're all confirmed by the same link! And Rose, Carson and Atticus too. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 19:21, November 15, 2015 (UTC)

Thank ye!--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 19:37, November 15, 2015 (UTC)

I have done that bit. :D--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 19:43, November 15, 2015 (UTC)

Home Page Issues - Fandom link Edit

Should be fixed now... I was being too clever. The fandom wiki is not a real wiki, so the link didn't work. Should be fixed now. Thanks for the catch. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5 Jan 2016 12:50 PM Pacific

Sybil Branson rolled back Edit

I just go to the old id version, copy the source, and paste it in a new edit session. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 7 Mar 2016 10:05 AM Pacific

Template helpEdit

How do I edit the "Click to see [More]" template? Do you know where it is?--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:03, February 24, 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean "Minor character more info"? You can find it here
BTW, IMDB spells Hugh MacClare's nickname as "Shrimpie".

Ehj666 (talk) 17:20, February 24, 2017 (UTC)

Questionable information Edit

Thanks for the information. I did know, of course, that the [2] was a footnote reference but what I didn't understand was the notation 3.03. The fact is, I thought what you wrote was probably what it was but then the reference made no sense because I have the Season 3 Complete Scripts book and have watched the series numerous times and I've never come across this information before. I can't find it anywhere. Where did this information come from? It is not in the Season 3, Episode 3 script and it is not in the actual film series.

This is the information in question, which  is on Anthony Strallan's page:


In 1896 - when he was around thirty - Anthony attended a party at Lady Londonderry's and met the Duchess of Marlborough when she arrived from America; he thought that she was "the most beautiful woman" he had ever seen[2]. "

Lady Victoria Evrard (talk) 17:49, January 8, 2018 (UTC)

Cannot find the information Edit

Thank you for your welcome! I will read the guides and policies when I can. I was questioning the footnote [2] on the Downton Abbey, Anthony Strallan page. It says the information is from 3.03 which I assume is Season 3, Scene 3. You wrote in your reply to me that you thought the information came from a Forward written by Julian Fellowes. To my knowledge, I have all four of the official Downton Abbey books, written by Jessica Fellowes with Forwards by Julian Fellows. I also have The Wit And Wisdom of Downton Abbey. I've read all the Forwards and still cannot find the information. I would like to know where this information is to be found.

Whether I've found the information in a Forward or in any other place is not really the point. My point is, the footnote is wrong and this should be corrected. This might seem like a small thing but I think people should be able to trust the information that is written, just as they do on Wikipedia. I sometimes edit on Wikipedia when I find errors and I contribute monthly. 

Lady Victoria Evrard (talk) 23:09, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Just minutes after I posted the above, I found the information. It's in Downton Abbey: The Complete Scripts - Season Three. Episode 3, Act 2 on page 152. It was part of the original script but the scene was not filmed. I still think the footnote reference "3.03" is wrong. Please let me know if I'm missing something. If you think it's wrong, I'll correct it.


Lady Victoria Evrard (talk) 23:34, January 9, 2018 (UTC)

Maud BagshawEdit

Just thought you ought to know, Lord Bagshaw had to be dead before the second Boer Wars thanks to Maud's words in the film.To make it fit, Lord Bagshaw had to have died in 1880 or 1881 in the first Boer Wars. I've edited the article accordingly. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:42, September 26, 2019 (UTC)

It has to be the first Boer Wars. There's no other option, unfortunately. Maud says that Jack died during the Boer Wars when Lucy was "six". From this, we can work out several things:

  • The Boer Wars took place between 11 October 1899 and 31 May 1902 - this is historical knowledge.
  • Lucy turned "six" between those two dates, so was born between 1893 and 1896, which puts her at at "six" some point during the Boer Wars when Jack died.
  • Maud tells Isobel that she was "39" when she conceived Lucy and believed she was barren. If Lucy was born in 1893, then Maud would have given birth at the age of 40 and been born in 1853; if Lucy was born in 1896, then Maud would have given birth at the age of 40 and been born in 1856. That's how we calculated her age: (1896 - 40 = 1856. 1893 - 40 = 1853, meaning she's somewhere between 71 and 74.)
  • Maud says that she and Jack had "ten years" together, meaning that they got together four years before Lucy's birth. This means they got together between 1889 and 1892.
  • Maud mentions that David, too, died in the Boer Wars, but for all the years to line up, she has to be referring to the first Boer Wars between 20 December 1880 and 23 March 1881.
  • This is the only way all of the information from the movie can work together. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:06, September 27, 2019 (UTC)

David isn't her father - David is her husband. We don't know *when* her father died, only that it was after she had Lucy and Lucy can *only* be born between 1893 and 1896 and with Maud's words, her husband died in 1880 or 1881. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:06, September 27, 2019 (UTC)

Join me in the chat?HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:08, September 27, 2019 (UTC)

You have it wrong. Maud didn't have ten years with her husband, David. She had ten years with Lucy's father, JACK. Join me in the chat so we can go through this? HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:23, September 27, 2019 (UTC)

She mentions that he was a "kind" man, but "dull" and died in the Boer Wars (it's when she's talking in the Foyer that we learn that!). For Lucy's age and her affair with Jack to be right, he had to have died in the first Boer Wars of 1880 - 1881. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 00:23, September 28, 2019 (UTC)

I won't ask. :D But yes, the plural is wrong. It should be the first Boer War for David and the *second* for Jack. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 09:13, September 28, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.