Talk:Dracula (1995 play)

Notability

In response to this getting tagged for Notability... I recently took an interest in stage adaptations of Dracula, and have found no source, on Wikipedia or the web in general, that collects information on them. Therefore, I've been creating pages for those that I can find information on. Some adaptations have many critical reviews in mainstream newspapers, such as Dracula (1996), and I suspect there will be no challenge to their notability. However, there are less often produced adaptations, like this one, that probably do not meet Notability guidelines, and should probably merged into SOME article. But, which one?

The main Dracula page has a short Adaptations section, which directs readers to Dracula in popular culture. That page seems to be the best fit for adaptations not notable enough to warrant their own page. However, there is no section on that page for stage adaptations. Perhaps there should be a seperate pages for Adaptations (film, television, AND stage) and ...in popular culture? Maybe I misunderstand the term "popular culture", but it seems bit of a misfit for variations on an original work. --Dereksmootz (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dracula (1995 play). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Non-notable, should be merged with John Godber. Best, --Discographer (talk) 16:13, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 December 2018

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 section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus (closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 11:34, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

– As Antigone (Sophocles play), Antigone (Euripides play), Antigone (Anouilh play), Antigone (Cocteau play), Antigone (Garnier play), Antigone (Brecht play); Plays are books WP:NCBOOKS, published materials which may be staged in different years, not a film which has a fixed release year. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 13:19, 15 December 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 16:12, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Plays should be additionally disambiguated by authors' surnames for WP:RECOGNISABILITY. See WP:NCBOOKS#Standard disambiguation and the RFC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (books)#RFC: Does this guideline cover plays and other literary works? --wooden superman 09:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose given the lack of consensus over applying the current WP:NCBOOKS guidance to performance works. Plays are books just like songs are sheet music and films are screenplays, but they aren't all being handled the same way. Instead of opening multiple move requests on individual articles, it would be better to get consensus on the guideline. --RL0919 (talk) 05:26, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per RLO919 (although, of course, plays aren't books nor songs sheet music or scripts films). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting note: !votes are at 2-2. Perhaps WikiProject Literature could be notified to get their input? SITH (talk) 16:12, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- There's already a RfC on this topic at WT:Naming_conventions_(books)#RFC:_Does_this_guideline_cover_plays_and_other_literary_works?. This RM should probably not be closed before that RfC is completed. Station1 (talk) 00:57, 27 December 2018 (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.

@Station1: per the closing guidelines I've done it as no consensus but obviously this is with NPASR on the RFC's conclusion. SITH (talk) 11:45, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. It looks like the RfC is stalled for the moment anyway. Station1 (talk) 01:30, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]