Talk:The Merry Widow (ballet)

Editing external links

Pigsonthewing removed a link to an important external page, regarding the history of the operetta from the ballet was created. His reasomn was presumably because he thought that the page was a frame on another page to which we have an external link. If that was what he thought, then he was wrong, and he should not have interfered. Figaro 12:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

No, your powers of telepathy are failing you. I removed a link to an article about the operetta, from a page about the ballet. You, on the other hand, reverted, my entire edit, thereby reintroducing several errors, on the spurious grounds that my edit was ""unnecessary interference". That is not acceptable - you do not own the article. Andy Mabbett 12:59, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

So you think that the historical context of the ballet in unimportant. Others will disagree with you, and it is not your decision about whether the historical context is of importance. Figaro 13:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

So you think that the historical context of the ballet in unimportant. Now you're making things up. Andy Mabbett 14:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Editing

Could those people who do not know anything about the ballet please refrain from making edits to this article. I have been trying to refine the plot synopsis, and it is counterproductive to have to continually cope with the interference of those who know nothing about the ballet. Why don't you go and edit articles on subjects that you actually do know something about? Figaro 09:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The number of times I've seen that argument... This comes down to a misunderstanding of how Wikipedia works. As Andy says, matters of style and format are quite independent of matters of content. There is also the problem that specialists can be too close to a subject and fail to see what an article looks like to a general reader: for instance, failing to explain or hyperlink specialist terminology, such as musical terms or what a grisette is (not that the operatta is very enlightening).

Also Wikipedia is, fundamentally, not based on personal knowledge but on reference to published sources that any editor can find. Figaro said in one edit summary [1] "My edits are based on several viewings of this ballet - both live performances and VHS". To Wikipedia, that's out as original research (the same section mentions role of expert editors).

There are many synopses of the ballet on the Web such as those at PNB, ant.org and the Brussels Light Opera Company. Information in these has to take precedence over any personal recollection. Tearlach 18:38, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

First of all, I am surprised that Tearlach pointed to the Brussels Light Opera Company website for the synopsis of the ballet, when it would have been evident to anybody who had any familiarity with these matters that the synopsis is actually for the operetta (the fact that the website is for an opera company, and not a ballet company, is a very big hint). Tearlach was wrong in his assertion that the synopsis on the Brussels Light Opera Company website takes precedence over any ballet synopsis that has been written for the ballet page, for the simple reason that the synopsis that was supplied on that particular website was not for the ballet. It is very surprising that Tearlach thought that it was the synopsis for the ballet.

In the case of performances of operas, operettas and ballets, synopses are always supplied with the programme, so that the programme serves as a published source for the information. Also, VHS tapes, DVDs, and television broadcasts also serve as published sources which can be cited, so seeing various versions of a ballet, opera or operetta does not count as "original research". There is also the fact that many people have seen these performances, so that the multitude of people who are familiar with the work can work together as a group to hone the synopsis. There is no question of specialist expert editors in this case.

People who are not so familiar with the topic in hand can make factual errors (and this has certainly happened), and it is the duty of those who are more familiar with the topics to correct the errors of those who are not so familiar. While it can be argued that experts, and other knowledgeable people, can make a topic too esoteric for the general populace to understand, this should not stop them from making contributions to the topic, or from correcting errors made by those who are less knowledgeable.

It is also frustrating to see correct informatuon being contiunally replaced by incorrect information, only to see the information being reverted to the incorrect information again after it has been corrected.

All plot synopses submitted to Wikipedia need to be based on personal knowledge, or observation, and not directly quoting from published sources, as you seem to be suggesting, because to do so would be a 'copyright violation', which would be frowned upon by Wikipedia. Also, published sources have been known to sometimes have mistakes.

Finally, the links you provided have been put to good use - the kind of use that *you* could have put them to - i.e. I added the two ballet synopses to the external links area of the ballet page, and added the operetta synopsis to the operetta page. Figaro 12:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Further to my previous comment, the word 'grisette' does not appear in the ballet synopsis (which this talk page is discussing), although grisettes are present within the ballet.

Mention of the grisettes was made, instead, in the cast list, where they were referred to as 'Can-Can ladies' (this has now been updated to 'Grisettes' (instead of 'Can-Can ladies'), with a direct link through to the 'Grisettes' own page.

Finally, your comment about 'original research' is incorrect when applied to my edits on the article page. I was not presenting original research - I was commenting on work created by other people which is publicly available. Figaro 12:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Editing (2)

Could those people who do not know anything about how Wikipedia works please refrain from making edits to this article. Every edit page says (emphasis in original):

If you don't want your writing to be edited and redistributed by others, do not submit it.

Andy Mabbett 10:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but I expect people who know about the subject to edit what is written. In the case of The Merry Widow (ballet), that does not include you. Figaro 12:09, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Please provide your evidence for that remarkable, and false, accusation. Or retract it. Note also that knowledge of a sucbject is NOT a requirement to make edits to a page, on matters of formatting, linking, grammar etc. Andy Mabbett 12:31, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I note that, despite Figaro's recent activity, no such evidence has been provided. Andy Mabbett 17:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The comparison between the operetta and the ballet

I would like to comment here that my reason for writing the paragraph, comparing the differences between the operetta version (where Valenticenne's fan is a major feature), and the ballet version (where the kerchief is a major feature), is because of the merging of the two together by another member of Wikipedia, when the ballet article was initially set up. The paragraph was intended to illustrate that the two should not be merged. I admit that I should have removed the paragraph from the ballet article some time ago, but did not get around to doing so until the 'comparison paragraph' was repeatedly, and incorrectly, put into the plot summary by Pigsonthewing. I have repeatedly tried to explain, without avail, that the comparison had nothing to do with the plot summary for the ballet, but this was continually ignored. Therefore, I removed the 'comparison paragraph' from the article, altogether. Hopefully this will be the last heard of this particular paragraph.

I would also like to comment that I joined Wikipedia with the sole intention of contributing in a positive manner to the encyclopedia. I did not join Wikipedia to bicker with anyone. I would therefore appreciate it if Pigsonthewing stopped deliberately setting out to destroy what I have done. Figaro 12:08, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I can't stop that, never having started. Cease making personal attacks. You also appear to be in breach of WP:3RR. I'll give you a short while to revert your latest reversion, in case you were not aware of that policy, before I report the breach. Andy Mabbett 12:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Broadcast and recording

Were the broadcast and video from the same performance? Was the CD also from one of them, or was it recorded spearately? Andy Mabbett 12:09, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

In answer to the first question, yes. In answer to the second question, the CD was probably recorded separately, in the studio. Figaro 12:29, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

State Theatre

I can see having just one name for the location and agree it should be the specific building, but the problem is Wikipedia has an article for the arts center but not the state theater. I'll create a stub, but I really know nothing about the place. Figaro, have you been there? --CBDunkerson 14:21, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

The State Theatre is a theatre within the building (one of several performance areas within the building). I have been to several performances in the State Theatre, both operatic and dance. These include the Essgee production of "The Merry Widow" operetta (which I saw in the State Theattre in 1999, when the company took it to Melbourne, as it toured Australia after it premiered its production in the Lyric Theatre in the Queensland Performing Arts Centre, Brisbane in 1998, which I also saw - Essgee changed many aspects of the production between 1998 and 1999, and I preferred what they did in Brisbane). I also saw the Australian Ballet perfomance of "The Merry Widow" ballet in its 2000 season at the State Theatre in Victoria. Figaro 15:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Chez Maxim

The name of the restaurant should be called "Chez Maxim" since the name of the establishment within the ballet, i.e. as a proper noun. Figaro 00:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The-Merry-Widow-Ballet-music.jpg

Image:The-Merry-Widow-Ballet-music.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 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 06:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Merry Widow Ballet - DVD.jpg

Image:The Merry Widow Ballet - DVD.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 15:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Merry-Widow-Ballet-ad.jpg

Image:Merry-Widow-Ballet-ad.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 00:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)