Talk:Theatre of the United Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Theatre (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United Kingdom (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

DREADFUL[edit]

This is quite the worst Wikipedia entry I have ever come across. Please remove it, as it is a complete insult.

You could be bold and improve it! Or if it really does require deletion, outline some good reasons and I will take it to deletion.--Commander Keane (talk) 00:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's completely anglocentric for starters. In fact, not even Anglocentric, since it doesn't discuss Northern England's vibrant tradition of repetory theatre either.--MacRùsgail (talk) 15:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Cleanup[edit]

I am thinking of a clean up and sourcing of this article. This would include the addition of more material about areas outside of southern England. A major issue is the extensive material from British literature, which, while it gives the article some much needed depth and geographical breadth, seems excessive for an article with United Kingdom in the title (as suggested by the appearance of a sub-heading identical with the article about half way down). I would like to get views on cutting this down to some briefer national summaries. Any thoughts are welcome.--SabreBD (talk) 14:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)