Template:Did you know nominations/The Sun Also Rises (ballet)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:24, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

The Sun Also Rises (ballet), The Select (The Sun Also Rises), The Sun Also Rises (1984 film)[edit]

( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links:
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 02:28, 28 March 2014 (UTC).

  • Created by TonyTheTiger on March 26, 2014 with 1,640 characters of readable prose as of now. Supported by inline citations throughout, with hook from dancetabs.com. Classified as a stub which needs to be fixed. Good to go. Consider ALT1 below for clarity: per source, novel in not en pointe, the ballet adaptation is. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 15:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: The ALT2 below is not part of my review, neither the hook, nor the new article. Poeticbent talk 14:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

"of sound" in the second alternative is redundant. Cacophony is of sound by its nature. Bellemora (talk) 16:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Can someone take a look at this again.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
  • I have struck out the original hook because it is unclear, and I have rated all three articles "C class" on their talkpages because they are no longer stub class.--Storye book (talk) 09:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
  • The following full review is for ALT1 and ALT3 only. Ballet, film and stage version are all new enough, long enough (nominated 26-30 March). ALT1 and ALT3 (re the ballet) checks out online, citation #3. ALT3 (re the film) checks out online with citation #3. ALT3 (re the stage adaptation) checks out online, citation #10. QPQ OK. No problem with disambig links (all three versions) or ext. links (ballet and stage version). Images in ballet and stage articles are fair-use. No plagiarism found. Issues: (1) Image for hook is free, but the same image needs to be also in the articles. (2) Ext. link in citation #4 (film version) is redundant. If issues (1) and (2) can be resolved, it's good to go for ALT1 and ALT3. --Storye book (talk) 09:58, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Personally I'd accept it if you simply deleted citation #4 and left the relevant sentence without a citation until you can find another source - since the rest of the para is cited. If you are unhappy with an uncited sentence, I suggest that you copy it to the talkpage until you can find a citation for it (as we do with developing news articles). Let's get this baby promoted! --Storye book (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
  • All issues resolved. Well done, guys! Good to go. --Storye book (talk) 18:53, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
With the long quote properly blockquoted, the 1984 film does not have enough original prose. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:06, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Nikkimaria for spotting this. Tony the Tiger, please add more cited text to the 1984 film version so that we can resolve this quickly? Thank you. --Storye book (talk) 07:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you TonyTheTiger. the 1984 film version article is now long enough. Good to go (at last!) for ALT3. --Storye book (talk) 16:38, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I went to check into restoring this to prep, but found that the new Critical commentary material from Hauptfuhrer was not properly used in the section. His article was a teaser, written three months before the film/miniseries aired on television. I'd like to suggest that an actual review by a critic who saw the final product would be more appropriate. Also, to say that the youthful characters opinion was "according to Hauptfuhrer", when he writes "it is claimed", is simply inaccurate. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • LOL, there's no end to this. Thanks for the head-up, BlueMoonset. Let's hope it's sorted soon and we can all keep our cool. Meanwhile I've undone my review above and alerted the nominator. --Storye book (talk) 17:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • The fact that the review was a preview, does not mean he had not seen the finished product. A lot of made for television movies are completed three months before they are aired. I don't know what Power looked like at 43 or what Bochner looked like at 27, but it is not too big of a leap to say that a 27-year-old actor could better portray a youthful character than a 43-year-old one could. There are not a lot of reviews for this film. Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic do not cover this film. All I can really do is rehash the limited (p)reviews I have found.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Tony, please may I suggest that you add a plot synopsis in your own words, using your citation #4? Lots of film articles have the plot written out. You could also add a sentence on the tech specs using this ref from IMDb. Good luck and thanks for helping! --Storye book (talk) 18:52, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you TonyTheTiger for bringing the prose up to size - one more problem resolved. I am satisfied that the plot synopsis is in your own words. All that is left to do is: (1) Add citation #4 to the plot paragraph; (2) Remove the two sentences cited to Hauptfuhrer, which have caused objections from BlueMoonset, above. (3) Thank you for your patience in this. --Storye book (talk) 06:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "People's Fred Hauptfuhrer notes that "Heminway purists" may be offended by some of the changes." -it is irrelevant whether this criticism comes from a preview or a review. --TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:23, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
  • "While the 1957 film starred a 43-year-old Tyrone Power and 34-year-old Ava Gardner, the 1984 adaptation starred a 27-year-old Bochner and 33-year-old Seymour, who could better depict the youthful characters of the source novel, according to Hauptfuhrer." is objective and informative up to the word Seymour. Can you further explain the problem with "who could better depict the youthful characters of the source novel".--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:23, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
  • All I am concerned with here is clearing the backlog of DYK reviews, and that includes speeding this one as best we can manage. With that in mind, plus User:BlueMoonset's stated opinion about the usage of the Hauptfuhrer source - the simplest solution is for you to remove the Hauptfuhrer bits for the duration of the DYK process, and for you to re-edit the article as appropriate afterwards. It's also worth noting that the DYK process is an exercise for us all in learning more about how WP works. I hope that helps. Many of us have to sacrifice precious content (at least temporarily) to get our articles through DYK, but DYK is not a finality.--Storye book (talk) 07:39, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Removing something for the duration of DYK is screwy: either it should be in the article or it shouldn't. I've edited it to conform with the statement in the source. Belle (talk) 08:44, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the edit, Belle - no problem now. My apologies for the misunderstanding about temporary edits for duration of DYK - I should have clarified that doing that would give time to research and consider a more appropriate edit afterwards (not the same edit put back!), so that we can speed up promotion now. Good to go - at last.--Storye book (talk) 11:12, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/The_Sun_Also_Rises_(ballet)&oldid=1016643435"