Talk:Gay Bride of Frankenstein

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 June 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Notability

What do I need to do to prove the show has "notability"? I'm new the Wiki so my editing skills are not perfect. I'm not spamming. Just trying to bring attention a something I've been working on for many years that is truly inspired by Shelly's novel. My show addresses many issues and is not just a gay romp of musical theater. In fact isn't musical theatre an art form? Please advise.

In good faith - Bb

First, read the general notability guidelines and the conflict of interest guideline. In a nutshell, to show that a subject is notable there must be independent reliable sources that significantly cover the subject. Multiple published reviews, substantive discussion (not mere mentions) in scholarly works, and so on. See Yank! and The Temperamentals, two articles on stage shows I recently worked on, for examples showing such sourcing. I searched for sources before suggesting this article be deleted and didn't find anything to indicate that the musical is notable. Should the professional production that's anticipated for this fall come about, then reliable sources might be generated. If so, then another editor will probably take notice and write an article. Since you're an author of the musical, you should refrain from writing or editing it, but if you do it's important that you disclose your connection to the subject on your talk page and the talk page for the article.
As far as including material on the musical in Bride of Frankenstein and Frankenstein in popular culture goes, it first needs to be established that the musical itself is notable, as non-notable material tends to be considered trivia and removed. Should the musical be considered notable, before adding it to BoF there should be reliable sources that make the connection between the film and the musical beyond the shared naming aspect. Is GBoF a re-telling of the BoF story, is it a re-imagining, do they share plot, characters, setting, theme, and so on. Same goes for the FIPC article, possibly even more so, because "Foo in popular culture" articles tend to get overloaded with "This one character in this one episode of this TV show said 'Foo' once"-type information, turning them into dumping grounds. See Adaptations of Moby-Dick, Champagne in popular culture and Adaptations of The Picture of Dorian Gray as examples of "in popular culture" articles that are better-done than most. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 12:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment on GBoF. The show was one of last years NYMF choices and I should think that alone would make it notable.72.71.251.37 (talk) 14:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gay Bride of Frankenstein. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723212450/http://www.playbill.com:80/news/article/151921-Off-Broadways-Gay-Bride-of-Frankenstein-Finds-Its-Director to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/151921-Off-Broadways-Gay-Bride-of-Frankenstein-Finds-Its-Director

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 15:56, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]