Talk:Invisible theater

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Invisible theater article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Invisible theater. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Invisible theater at the Reference desk.

Move?

Invisible theater → Invisible theatre — Most-common spelling for article titles. — DionysosProteus (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
More specifically, consistency with parent topic, Theatre. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 16:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks most like merely a UK/USA spelling dispute to me. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- That was my first impression, until I noted that Theatre started out with U.S. spelling, and was eventually moved, and this article started out the opposite, with British spelling,[1] although named using U.S. spelling (Invisible Theater). All of the linked articles use British spelling. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 02:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
-re is also used in every other english-speaking nation; -er is the less-common form. DionysosProteus (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose any moves related to spelling variations, per WP:ENGVAR. Dekimasuよ! 14:14, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Then, to be consistent, you ought to support the reversion to its original, most-common spelling. DionysosProteus (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - If the move was recent, I would agree with you, but it was 3.5 years ago. I know that the original title is considered in some cases, but here it just doesn't seem necessary to have a spelling argument at all. Dekimasuよ! 23:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When all the primary sources use the -re spelling, then that, following the most-common use principle, ought to be the spelling for the article. DionysosProteus (talk) 12:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No thanks we don't do silly moves like this, that's how we ended up with fixed-wing aircraft. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 18:30, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that being...? DionysosProteus (talk) 00:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article appears to have a lot of opinion

The "Purpose" section is completely un-cited.

The "Common Misconceptions" section is similarly un-cited, but also includes much more opinion. "This is a gross mistake" is clearly opinion. Also in reference to the "Free Hugs campaign" it says: "This could be considered Invisible Theatre, as it is not a joke or a punk, but again as it has no basis in oppression it is not Invisible Theatre." this is again un-cited and seems to look like opinion.

What are other people's thoughts on this?