Jump to content

Talk:9 to 5 (musical)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2009 Broadway Planned

[edit]

I don't see what the problem is with having the 2009 Broadway Planned on this article. This article: [1] also has Broadway Planned and it is still up there.

I'll fix it at Shrek. The upcoming Broadway production is discussed in the body of the article. No need to clutter up the infobox with it. If the out-of-town tryout bombs, it may never go to Broadway. See WP:CRYSTAL. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Musical numbers

[edit]

The show will start in previews on September 9, 2008. Until then,I don't know how to verify the list of musical numbers. (Even then, probably won't get a review until official opening on Sept. 20.)JeanColumbia (talk) 18:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any thoughts on what should be done with them, then? As I said in my edit summary, they look believable enough, but I know looking "believable enough" doesn't exactly work with WP:V. I'd hate to remove helpful information about the show from the article, but at the same time I'd hate to see it filled with inaccuracies. If an established user had been the one to introduce the musical numbers I probably wouldn't have even questioned the songs, but the fact that they were added in an IP's first edit led me to wonder if anyone else could confirm the information. —MearsMan talk 18:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, MearsMan. Oh, yes, I have a few ideas 1) let's let this jell for a few days and see who else chimes in; 2) we'll get a review or 2 by Sept. 20, so we should be ok then.3) meanwhile, I've put in a weasel word or 2 in the subheading. Feel free to use something else (or to ignore me entirely. (joke). JeanColumbia (talk) 18:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Jean, your suggestions seem reasonable enough. :-) I was caught between simply leaving the list in the article and moving it to the talk page, but this seems like a decent enough compromise. We're no longer trying to pass the information off as if it's the song list, and it shouldn't be too long before we can confirm the it. —MearsMan talk 19:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to an **unnamed** chat forum, I was led to the program at the Ahmanson Theatre, which has the songs listed (along with the cast/characters). So, the list is referenced. (Of course, this is out-of-town tryouts but that isn't anything we need to think about right now ! JeanColumbia (talk) 18:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

[edit]

Here's some reviews, if anyone wants to sum up the key points for the article:

Annie D (talk) 01:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Drama Desk Award for Outsanding Actress in a Musical

[edit]

We needed to seperate the women form the parenthesis for the Drama Desk Award for Oustanding Actress in a Musical because one of them might win it.

Plot

[edit]

Someone needs to add a plot synopsis. I don't want to assume it's the same as the movie and summarize the plot from that. 209.247.22.164 (talk) 15:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this relevant?

[edit]

"Parton was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Song for the film's title tune. The single release of the song went to #1 on both the Billboard Hot 100 and Billboard Hot Country Songs charts, was certified platinum by the RIAA and was nominated for four Grammy Awards, winning two." Can somebody please explain why this information belongs in the article about the musical? 209.247.22.166 (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, deleted same, moved a few bits to the film article (which had most of it already).JeanColumbia (talk) 17:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Did the extraordinary popularity of the song lead Parton to think that a musical treatment of the film might be a success? If so, we should say something about that in the background section. Even if it was not directly a factor in creating the musical, it seems that the musical's score benefits from the get-go by including a #1 song? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone can find that kind of info, by a WP:RS, would be good to have in the article, but I will not put it in myself, as that would be speculative, or original research, coming from me. I haven't read all of the reviews, has anyone? Could be that some critic has mentioned it.JeanColumbia (talk) 21:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are these relevant?

[edit]

Are BroadwayWorld.com's 7th Annual Theatre Fans' Choice Awards important enough to list? IMHO, they're not. 209.247.22.164 (talk) 17:50, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They probably fail the WP:NOTABILITY guidelines, but the guidelines for musical theatre articles {Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure) are not at all clear on this. If it were up to me, I would not have them in the article, based on the notability issue, and possibly, violation of: neutral point-of-view (WP:NPOV), "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" (WP:INDISCRIMINATE); AND "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" (WP:SOAP, #2). But, ultimately, rather than cite/quote Wiki guidelines and policy, I think that these "Awards" are not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia, just my plain personal opinion. JeanColumbia (talk) 18:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since we agree, I'm going to be bold and remove them. 209.247.22.164 (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 9 to 5 (musical). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:54, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 9 to 5 (musical). 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}}).

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) 16:29, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 9 to 5 (musical). 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, 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) 23:58, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on 9 to 5 (musical). 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, 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) 05:23, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 9 to 5 (musical). 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, 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) 16:05, 13 September 2017 (UTC) fortnite — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.93.84.92 (talk) 17:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:9_to_5_(musical)&oldid=1197117191"