Talk:Wicked (musical)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "grimmerie" :
  • {{cite book | author=David Cote | title=Wicked: The Grimmerie: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Hit Broadway Musical|publisher=Hyperion| year=2005|id=ISBN 1-4013-0820-1 }}
  • {{cite book |author=David Cote |title=Wicked: The Grimmerie: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Hit Broadway Musical|publisher=Hyperion|year=2005|page=13|id=ISBN 1-4013-0820-1}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 13:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. -- Dafyd (talk) 16:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Images

I'm worried that we're using a few too many fair use images of performances here. Can someone explain why we need so many? Phil Sandifer (talk) 14:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Elphaba's Name

Elphaba's name is listed as elphaba thropp, but she isnt called that in the show. i keep changing it but people keep changing it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.141.22.99 (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

Actually, my comments in my latest edit notwithstanding, there isn't one clear language variant present in the article. We have "capitalise" and "organize", and "honor" together with "colour". We should decide (preferably amiably :D) which variant to use, and stick with it. I'd argue for en-gb (naturally :D) partly because I think there's slightly more of it in the prose at the moment than en-us, but mainly because there are more en-gb productions (or productions in countries where en-gb is spoken rather than en-us) open or opening than there are en-us (remembering that the North American productions, visiting both the USA and Canada, can't really count for one or the other). I know the difference it utterly inconsequential when the production is spoken (and let's be honest, the choice of one or the other is itself pretty trivial), but a decision has to be made, and to not be made on the basis of how many editors happen to speak whichever variant. Comments? Happy‑melon 15:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Liberetto link legality

I noticed the link to the musical's entire liberetto. This is on a russian website, and doesn't look like it is legal. Should this be removed?

Immediately, but I'm scared to click it. I might get arrested. I'm kidding. I'll remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.244.120 (talk) 00:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Was Fiyero changed back?

I've never seen the musical, so I was wondering if Fiyero was changed back from being a scarecrow or not? Can someone tell me because the plot overview's wording left me confused, as it didnt say whether he was changed back or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.64.72 (talk) 01:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Nope, he is still a scarecrow at the end of the musical -- Dafyd (talk) 08:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

ahhhhhhhh, thats deppressing..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.81.65.12 (talk) 19:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Cast lists rules

Resuscitated from archive... -- Dafyd (talk) 18:29, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

We can keep the cast lists as long as there is no nonsense added to them such as saying celebrities like Bill Clinton, Cher, or David Letterman are joining the casts. In order to make an addition to the cast lists, there must be confirmation from a news source or this website: [1]. It has been accurate many times because of the members HAVE spoken to cast members about replacements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by And1987 (talk • contribs)

• I disagree. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wicked cast lists was quite clear: we do not want these lists, neither in a separate article nor here.

Suggestion. Why don't you list merchants go over to Wikia and create you own wiki with a separate article for each production? Believe it or not, no-one will come trying to delete them! — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 12:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

There is an Oz Wiki. — MusicMaker5376 17:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

When this article was promoted to GA status, we had a long discussion about what to do with cast lists. It was decided (and there was a clear consensus on this, both from contributing editors and those who had nothing to do with the article) that long cast lists were bad. Wikipedia is not a directory. That said, notable cast members should be listed: they are important parts of each production. Basically, then, we decided that only actors who have their own articles on Wikipedia should be mentioned, and only those who took one of the principle roles (use your common sense). They should be mentioned in prose with each production ("Notable replacements in the Broadway cast have included...").

Wicked is currently a Good Article, and is not far off an FA. Long lists of actors will only add to the article's cruft... they will be deleted.

-- Dafyd (talk) 17:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

To add... the article, without cast lists, is currently about 60kb. This is already a big article according to WP:LENGTH. Adding the cast lists pushes the article past 100kb, which is far too big. Usually, I would suggest that the cast lists could have their own article, but clearly the community has decided that they don't deserve one. If they don't get their own article, they don't go here either. Please. -- Dafyd (talk) 08:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

• Since no-one else would do it, I have now posted the sact lists to wikia:oz:Wicked cast lists. Watch that space. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 03:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I realize I have arrived far too late to this argument over the cast list, but I was surprised that the article didn't list the names of the original Broadway principle cast members. I came to this article specifically seeking such information and was disappointed to find no list. I truly believe the following list, taken from wikia:oz:Wicked cast lists (mentioned above) would be a good compromise, and would not add any burdensome length to the article:

Original Broadway Cast (2003)

Principals (in order of appearance)

  * Kristin Chenoweth as Glinda
  * Sean McCourt as Elphaba's Father
  * Cristy Candler as Elphaba's Mother
  * Jan Neuberger as The Midwife
  * Idina Menzel as Elphaba
  * Michelle Federer as Nessarose
  * Christopher Fitzgerald as Boq
  * Carole Shelley as Madame Morrible
  * William Youmans as Doctor Dillamond
  * Norbert Leo Butz as Fiyero
  * Sean McCourt as The Ozian Official
  * Joel Grey as The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
  * Manuel Herrera as Chistery  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.182.19.18 (talk) 19:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC) 

The 2010 film

That's not true. Just because IMDb says so doesn't mean that it's true. Remember that IMDb is a user run web site just like Wikipedia. - Jasonbres (talk) 19:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The article cited IMDb? I have no idea about IMDb, but there's interviews with someone from Universal saying they're negotiating the adaptation of the musical to film, but they had no date cause the success of the musical makes the rights of adaptation from Stephen Schwartz hard to get... And Gregory Maguire has commented that there was going to be a movie version of the book, not soon, but there would be. Although he didn't mention if it was an adaptation of the musical or the book... Even so... It's not just rumors about the movie, I think... Lumi-chan (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

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? Happy‑melon 23:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

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 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

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. Happy‑melon 20:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

Image copyright problem with File:Fiyero.jpg

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)

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? Happy‑melon 08:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)