Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Theatre

WikiProject Musical Theatre

Main Talk Page

Cast and awards tables: Persistent accessibility issues

I was encouraged to post here by another editor. Please note that per MOS:DTAB, all data tables must have MOS:TABLECAPTIONS and semantic roles for columns and rows. These are required accessibility features or (among others) the blind to use our site. Please include them in all tables and definitely never remove them when you encounter them. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

I cannot disagree more strongly. Adding this redundant extra heading to these already bloated cast tables would not help visually impaired people in the least, because the section heading already alerts them to what is following and acts as this "caption". So they are not "required". If we want to improve the cast tables, I would suggest converting them all to the more concise style used in Carousel, which focuses on notable actors. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Disagree with what? That the blind don't need accessibility? MOS:DTAB is very clear:

Data tables should always include a caption.

What disagreement is there to be had in principle? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Just so everyone knows what, exactly, is being discussed, here is a diff where Koavf added a "caption" that he is advocating, in the musical Illinoise. He is suggesting that similar additional captions (besides the headings *and* table headings that are already there) must also be added to ALL the cast tables that exist in all musical and play articles. It is the second line here, "Overview of casts for Illinoise", but the caption is nonsense/redundant, as the table is NOT an overview, and obviously it's for Illinoise, as that is the subject of the article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Illinoise&diff=prev&oldid=1220439925

-- Ssilvers (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I concur with Ssilvers that the extra row with years is unhelpful clutter. Tim riley talk 17:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

It is helpful to the blind and in no sense clutter. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

It is required for all tables as per above. You also seem to not know that the table captions while the must be included do not necessarily have to be rendered. See {{sronly}}. Again:

Data tables should always include a caption

This is not optional. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Koavf until you can get consensus from other experts, we will not be implementing this. You are not the ultimate authority here. Experts who have engaged in this discussion have made it clear that this additional caption will clutter to the already bloated tables and will be unhelpful. Smitty1999 (talk) 21:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

There is consensus: it's in the MoS. See WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Please show me an "expert" on accessibility in this conversation. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I believe that Smitty means "experienced editors". I agree that no Wikipedian is an "expert" with respect to content discussion, including Koavf. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

And how did you discover that I am not an expert on accessibility? Is the past 20 years I have spent here not enough to be "experienced"? Is being an invited expert on the HTML5 Working Group not enough to be familiar with Web best practices? Please see that MOS:DTAB explicitly states that it is a consensus-built document, it explicitly states that all data tables need captions, and WP:LOCALCONSENSUS explicitly states that local groups of editors cannot "override" broader community consensus. Please tell me what I'm missing here. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ssilvers: please see the above. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I see that there is no consensus (in fact not a single person agreeing with you) to add the misinformation to the tables that you wish to add throughout Wikipedia's musical theatre entries that have cast tables. They are not "overviews", and they display only certain casts, as already captioned in the table headings. Please stop WP:BLUDGEONing this discussion. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

What “misinformation”? See that the MOS is a product of consensus and local consensus cannot override it. Again, what am I missing? If the problem is the content of the table captions, then make better ones, not delete them. All data tables are required to have captions, correct? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Cast tables issues more generally

See this edit, where someone else questioned the typical cast tables that are in many musical theatre articles. As I suggested above, it would be better to convert them all to the more concise style used in Carousel and The King and I, which focuses on notable actors. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

How is that relevant? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)You made a tangential subheading as I posted my comment. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I can agree with this partially. Classic shows like Carousel or The King and I have had numerous revivals. However, newer shows like The Outsiders or Illinoise don't have as many productions on their cast tables, so that is not necessary for the newer shows but definitely for the classics. Smitty1999 (talk) 12:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Sure, some shows, like revues or unsuccessful regional shows, are unlikely to have numerous major productions, but both The Outsiders and Illinoise have just been nominated for multiple Tony Awards and very well could become ubiquitously popular, and so columns in the cast table are likely to get out of control, like at Moulin Rouge! (musical). -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ssilvers We can implement that if/when tables get too bloated. For Moulin Rouge, I do agree that since so many productions of it have opened in the last few years, then we should condense the tables but not necessarily for new shows. Once they have more than a few different notable productions, then we can condense the tables to what they look like on Carousel or King and I. Cabaret is another one that needs a condensing as it has too many productions. Smitty1999 (talk) 21:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

That is a workable compromise, though it makes more work when we have to, basically, do the table twice. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I can help if you need it. It's the little things we have to do to make them better. Smitty1999 (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. If you have time, please go ahead on those two articles, and any others like them that you see from time to time, and I'll be happy to review if you ping me. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Certainly! Smitty1999 (talk) 22:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ssilvers I made the adjustment to the table on Moulin Rouge! Can you review to see how it looks? Smitty1999 (talk) 22:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Excellent. Please look at my minor edits and edit summaries. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Looks good. I will start working on the Cabaret table now. Smitty1999 (talk) 03:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

I think the concise tables are better and more user friendly. - SchroCat (talk) 13:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Damian Hubbard from Mean Girls

I've created Damian Hubbard about the fictional character from the film Mean Girls (2004) and subsequent adaptations, including the musical and 2024 film. Hoping some project members might be able to expand the article further re: the musical production. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft article: Can someone please review?: Draft:Masi Asare

Hi. I am copying this request here from the COTM talk page, which doesn't get much traffic. I hope someone can help this editor. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Wrote a new article for a Harvard-educated, Tony-nominated musical theater writer Draft:Masi Asare. She's the only writer of Paradise Square who doesn't have a page yet, and she's done a lot and has been covered fairly widely. I'm hoping this is a slam dunk that's not hard to get approved. So, if anyone has permissions to move articles to the mainspace, please let me know if there's anything I can do to get this article going. Thank you Wikipedian339 (talk) 21:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Musical Theatre in Japan and Korea (and elsewhere)

Hello, and nice to meet everyone.

I am a fan of theatre -- musical and otherwise -- and I live in Tokyo. I've noticed a shocking lack of information about modern theatre in Japan and Korea on English Wikipedia and on English sites in general. I've been trying to translate as much as I can and share information, particularly regarding shows that I'm a fan of, but I'm willing to help spread the word and translate about anything from Japanese (I don't know Korean or other languages).

There are hundreds of musicals that have premiered in Korea and Japan over the past few decades that are mostly unknown to English audiences.

I haven't created any pages yet. Would it be okay to create draft pages about musicals? Major ones, like Frankenstein, Fan Letter, Isabeau, Smoke...

The pages for Theater of Japan and Theater of Korea need major rewrites. Nothing modern is even suggested there. Very few major actors and almost no composers have pages.

To translate a page of an actor or a production from the Japanese Wikipedia site, what needs to happen, if there isn't a page at all in English yet?

I'm sorry for the newbie questions. I just want to know if there's anyone interested in improving coverage of these topics.

Thank you. EncreViolette (talk) 16:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Glad to have you aboard. Yes, by all means, create draft pages for new articles that you are confident are WP:Notable, and an easy way to start is to translate entries from Japanese Wikipedia that we do not have here. The reason that English Wikipedia does not have a lot of coverage of musicals first created in Asia is simply a matter of not having a lot of people who have chosen to work on that in the past. BTW, There is already an article called Frankenstein – A New Musical. Is that the one you mean? English WP has several other musicals articles based on Frankenstein, so check that before you start one. Please try to keep your Talk page comments more compact, like mine. Before you do a major re-write on an existing article, I would suggest going to the Talk page of that article and starting a new discussion about what you are planning to do. Then wait a few days to see if anyone has any objections or suggestions about how to proceed. Feel free to ask me questions on my Talk page about editing content. I am always happy to copy edit and explain content rules like WP:RS, WP:DUE, etc. Others are probably better at technical stuff like how to work in Draft. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply.

That is not the same Frankenstein musical. There have been at least 4 in the past 15 years. The article Frankenstein in Popular Culture has a note about the Korean one, but it has no article yet.

Regarding notability -- There is a news source called Stage Natalie. It covers stage plays from all producers, but I'm not close enough to the industry to know how independent it is from the producers. Should I make sure to find one more article besides that about any production to consider it notable?

Thank you.

EncreViolette (talk) 02:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

A notable production will normally have some combination of a notable director, notable leading actors, notable writer, lyricist and/or composer, and run for a long period of months or years. It will normally be reviewed by the major news sources that review theatre. If a play or musical has productions on Broadway or in the West End it is usually notable, but if it plays only in Japan, say, it should have a lot of the indicia of notability that I mentioned above before it could be considered notable. Start with the most notable, starriest, longest-running, most reviewed productions first. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Plays don't run for a long time in Japan and Korea, that isn't the business model. Even the most notable productions have pre-defined limited runs, sometimes of under a month. Video recordings are also far more common in Japan.

This is what I'm asking. The notability guidelines basically say that if there are articles about a work or a person, not just the work's own promotional materials, then that is enough to make it notable. Stage Natalie is a main news source that covers theatre. It's not the only one, but it seems to me to be the biggest one. What does something need to be notable, other than having neutral articles about it?

Another question: When is it worth making a separate page about a musical that is an adaptation, as opposed to having a section in the page for the original work?

There is a Category:Japanese Musicals list that is horribly incomplete. About a year ago, I tried adding pages of the source material of certain musicals (such as Cesare (manga) (why doesn't that article have the series' full title as its title?)) and those got cut from the page because the main topic of the article isn't a musical. Your Lie in April has a page. Is it okay to make a page for musicals that are adaptations? It'd be hard to argue that the Cesare musical isn't notable.

EncreViolette (talk) 02:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

You wrote: The notability guidelines basically say that if there are articles about a work or a person, not just the work's own promotional materials, then that is enough to make it notable." Well, the guidelines say that, at a minimum, you need multiple WP:Reliable sources that provide significant coverage, and they also say that notable topics have at least national coverage, if not international coverage. But even if you found a couple of sources, you should also consider whether this play/musical has been revived in significant productions. If a play only plays once, at a provincial theatre for a few weeks with a non-notable cast, why is it of encyclopedic interest? A really notable play will be reviewed by all, or at least most of, the major newspapers and news services that carry theatre reviews. You might want to put this on your watchlist for a few weeks: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Theatre to see what sorts of theatre articles get deleted for lack of notability, and which ones survive. Then, as I said, start working on the very most notable ones first. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

One should not be so shocked that things in the encyclopedia are not complete or not written about in English Wikipedia. Is the article you are shocked not to see in the Encyclopedia Brittanica? I doubt it. If not, it is not shocking at all. Further, this is a volunteer project. People work on what they know about or what they wish to research. Very often, subjects in predominantly non-English speaking countries are sparsely covered until someone, like you, with an interest in covering them, comes along. On the other hand, sometimes people come along who insist on writing about non-notable topics, and they are frustrated to see all of their efforts eventually deleted. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)