Talk:Roméo et Juliette (musical)

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Musical Theatre

Roméo et Juliette (musical) is part of WikiProject Musical Theatre, organized to improve and complete musical theatre articles and coverage on Wikipedia. You can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Musical TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject Musical TheatreTemplate:WikiProject Musical TheatreMusical Theatre articles

Shakespeare Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Konczewski, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 12 February 2007.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Copyediting

I'm new to the League of Copyeditors, so forgive me if I made some blunders. I found this article while trying to edit a duplicate, so I redirected the duplicate to here, and transferred the copyediting tag to this article as well. I tried to edit out the original author's unbalanced comments, and to reformat the headings. Please let me know what you think.Konczewski 19:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! BuddingJournalist 03:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, since the LOCE was here, this article accumulated piles of non-notable information. See below. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:R+jlogo.jpg

Image:R+jlogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article structure

This article is a mess. It may be that this is an important musical, but no one can tell because of the piles of useless information in the article. The sheer number of productions is less useful than a narrative description of what the most notable productions were, what important theatres they played in, how many patrons have seen each production, how much money they made (box office grosses), and what notable people have been involved with the productions. The article needs to cite to reviews by reputable reviewers who explain what they think about the show and its importance. Reliable sources of information about the show need to be cited. I just deleted scads of non-notable cast/crew information and endless songlists. Each production should have a paragraph describing what is NOTABLE about that production, not an entire list of non-notable people and translations of the song list. There should be only one song list with descriptions of what may have been significantly different from production to production. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure for a description of the article structure for musicals. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Romeoetjuliette(1).jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Romeoetjuliette(1).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:05, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: rename to Roméo et Juliette (musical). BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Roméo et Juliette, de la Haine à l'Amour → Romeo & Juliet (The Musical) – The official name of the English version of the musical Relisted. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC) AlexTref871 (talk) 05:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment do you have evidence that "Romeo & Juliet (The Musical)" (with the parentheses) is the official name? And why would that be the common name? I find it questionable that "(The Musical)" is part of a common name. The article doesn't even document the name you want. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 07:17, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as proposed - (The Musical) is certainly incorrect, it seems that Don Black's version is known as Romeo & Juliet: The Musical. However Romeo & Juliet (musical) might also be possible. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Romeo & Juliet (musical) or Roméo et Juliette (musical) per IIO. --BDD (talk) 23:59, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: The discussion so far shows an emerging consensus to rename to either Romeo & Juliet (musical) or Roméo et Juliette (musical). Please can editors continue the discussion, and try to agree on how to choose between those 2 alternatves?

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further reflection, I'd prefer Roméo et Juliette (musical) as my first choice. From what I can see in the references, the exact title of the musical seems to be localized to the vernacular name for Romeo and Juliet based on where it's being performed. Because of WP:UE there's still an argument for using the English form, but since this is a French play, I'd rather keep with its original French name. IIO, what do you think? --BDD (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes per BDD that sounds fine. It has the advantage of being reasonably transparent in English and French versions. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.