Jump to content

Talk:Wicked (musical): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by 71.166.34.97 - ""
Flim Version: new section
Line 83: Line 83:
== Netherlands ==
== Netherlands ==
I don't know what all this talk about Netherlands is about but the Stuttgart production is transferring to Oberhausen, not the Netherlands. That should be changed. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.166.34.97|71.166.34.97]] ([[User talk:71.166.34.97|talk]]) 08:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I don't know what all this talk about Netherlands is about but the Stuttgart production is transferring to Oberhausen, not the Netherlands. That should be changed. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.166.34.97|71.166.34.97]] ([[User talk:71.166.34.97|talk]]) 08:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Flim Version ==

I was doing some research about this I noticed that it came up alot that a flim version of wicked is in production and is slated to be released in 2010. Now I found some information about it on IMDB but I am not sure how reliable that site is cause it has some un realstic information about production. For example how all the cast is rumoured. I would think that it being released next year that they would have a confirmed cast. Does anyone have any other information about this they have come across? [[User:Headstrong 345|Headstrong 345]] ([[User talk:Headstrong 345|talk]]) 03:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)Headstrong 345

Revision as of 03:32, 29 June 2009

Good articleWicked (musical) has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 7, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
November 12, 2007Good article nomineeListed
December 3, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
January 22, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article

Template:LOCEcomplete

WICKED font

The official logotype for Wicked is a font called Rubens. Can anyone find it on a site for free? And does anyone know the clipart for the witch in the "I" ?

Rubens is easy enough to find. Try searching for it in conjunction with The Haunted Mansion or Phantom Manor, as it is the same font used on the plaque of these Disney attractions, and throughout. TR_Wolf

Cast lists

In agreement with the discussion above, I have removed the cast lists from this article for probably the second or third time. I intend to continue to do so unless there is a consensus here that they should be included. The cast lists have been removed several times from this article, indeed an entire list of them was deleted at AfD. Current consensus appears to be very clear: we do not want these lists in the article, nor do we want extensive 'prose lists' of cast replacements. Is there any reasoned argument why this consensus should be considered changed? Happymelon 23:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Broadway Replacements

Rent, Beauty and the Beast, and Hairspray have notable Broadway replacements in their articles. Why can't we have them here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sb1990 (talkcontribs) 18:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To list a few reasons:
  • WP:NOT#INFO: "Wikipedia articles are not... Lists or repositories... such as... persons (real or fictional).... [Separate lists] are certainly permitted..." So that's what we did... and then deleted. Clear consensus there.
  • WP:WPMT/AS#Productions: "The names of non-notable... ensemble and chorus members, understudies and non-notable production team members... should be deleted... For the original Broadway or West End production, there may be a cast list, with notable actors bluelinked, or the casting may be described in prose... However, there should not be full lists of replacement casts..." (my highlight). So if the cast are described in prose, as is the case in the "Tryout and Broadway production" section, there is no need to include a separate cast list.
  • There is a consensus of several editors just two sections above that these cast lists are therefore unnecessary and so should be removed.
I hope this clarifies the situation. Half of your addition is redundant to content already given in prose, the other half is directly proscribed by relevant guidelines. Please revert your addition. Happymelon 20:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original Broadway cast is listed in the narrative section about the Broadway production, above, so the list is redundant information. The replacement cast list does not indicate whether all of these people played the role for any notable length of time or were just understudies. What might be better would be to note, in the narrative section above describing the Broadway production, the notable actors who joined the principal cast for significant stretches of time, and when they were in the production. As for other articles that have cast information in list form, those articles are not as carefully watched and groomed as this one. Here's a thought: It is far less important to highlight the name of a Broadway replacement Nessarose than it is to highlight the actor who created Elphaba or Glinda on the West End. But if we start makings lists of all the casts, we get back to the problem of a proliferation of lists. I think that it is better to describe notable cast information in the production section. Another way to do it is to have a small chart setting forth the major roles and who created them (or played them for long stretches of time) in the most important productions. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The current guideline seems reasonable. Wikipedia is not a fan magazine, and repeated additions of non-notable persons to the cast list do not help the average reader who is looking for basic information on the musical. Thomprod (talk) 14:30, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the "Tryout and Broadway production" to "Production history" and moved information about the Broadway company to the "Other productions" section which is now the "Current and Previous Productions" section. Does this current version of the article follow the rules? And1987 (talk) 14:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image File:Fiyero.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --14:57, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cast blobs

Have replaced cast lists as the latest source of bloat in this article. We've finally decided that bare lists are not to be included, but now we have a proliferation of 'prose lists', or cast "blobs", that achieve largely the same purpose. I'm not saying that some of them are not useful; some of them should be retained, but the problem is that we now have so many edits going in that merely bloat out those sections that it's impossible to separate the good wood from the bad. We need to have a serious think about what casting information we're presenting in this article, and how best to present it, and take a firm line against additions that run counter to that decision. Thoughts? Happymelon 08:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Netherlands

I don't know what all this talk about Netherlands is about but the Stuttgart production is transferring to Oberhausen, not the Netherlands. That should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.34.97 (talk) 08:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flim Version

I was doing some research about this I noticed that it came up alot that a flim version of wicked is in production and is slated to be released in 2010. Now I found some information about it on IMDB but I am not sure how reliable that site is cause it has some un realstic information about production. For example how all the cast is rumoured. I would think that it being released next year that they would have a confirmed cast. Does anyone have any other information about this they have come across? Headstrong 345 (talk) 03:32, 29 June 2009 (UTC)Headstrong 345[reply]