Talk:Monte Cristo Jr. (Victorian burlesque)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plot summary needed[edit]

A brief plot summary section is needed to move this stub up to "Start" class. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:50, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 April 2024[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


– Whether there is a comma before "Jr." is a triviality, and in any event the image shown for the burlesque contains a comma and the one for the musical doesn't. Neither seems to be the primary topic, so disambiguate both. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pppery, I would support if you revised your request to make it Monte Cristo Jr. (Victorian burlesque) AND to remove the comma before Jr. in the musical. I would probably put the comma in the Meyer Lutz piece, even though the Brits don't like the comma, generally, but I don't feel strongly about that. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with both of those changes. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you please either edit your request above or re-propose so others and easily see what is being proposed? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding the years is not necessary and would not be helpful. There were no Victorian burlesques after 1891, and it is not a good idea to identify musicals by year: do we mean the year of composition? publication? premiere? first major production? most important production? I think the current request above is crystal clear in disambiguating them. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given year of release is how we disambiguate films I fail to see the issue! "Victorian burlesque" may be an adequate disambiguator, but "musical" certainly is not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you note, a film has a year of release. However, plays and musicals are often published long before they are ever performed, and the original production of a stage work might be in a tiny production, on one night, with an audience of four. Then it gets played at a slightly larger theatre in Podunk, then in an established regional theatre, and finally bursts on the scene in a Broadway or West End production, which is the only production that everyone later remembers. Indeed, many, many shows have had brief regional, touring, or off-Broadway tryouts before their big Broadway premiere. So it is not comparable to films. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, this one, apparently, did not! It opened in 1919, closed in 1919 and never appears to have been produced again. So I repeat, I fail to see the issue. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Ssilvers, above. I also find the use of the date potentially problematic for the reasons outlined (given we're not talking about a film, the comparison is not a suitable one). The stage works in, and is perceived in, very different ways. - SchroCat (talk) 15:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes to the move; no to adding the date, for obvious reasons. Tim riley talk 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

  • As the creator of the article, I support Yes to the move; no to adding the date. Jack1956 (talk) 05:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.