Jump to content

Talk:Ann Reinking

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

Weird digression?

[edit]

The opening of this article seems to have been temporarily pre-empted by an article about Mrs. Illaria Obidenna Ladre. Is anyone with more knowledge about the talented Ms. Reinking able to sort out whether this really belongs here?--NapoliRoma (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and trimmed this back. The content prior to my edit was:

Reinking originally trained as a ballet dancer. As a child in Seattle, she studied with Marian and Illaria Ladre, a professional ballet couple who had danced for years with the Ballets Russes (later the Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo). When the Ladres retired as dancers, they moved to Seattle (where they had performed) to create a ballet school. There they passed on their training to generations of aspiring dancers. Like Reinking, several went on to professional careers.

Mrs. Illaria Obidenna Ladre (1908-1998) was a native of Russia. She had studied ballet from a young age at the famous Imperial Ballet School, training school for the Kirov Ballet of the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg. (The 1977 documentary Children of Theatre Street was about the Imperial Ballet School, by then called the Vaganova Academy, whose alumni included Rudolph Nureyev and Mikhail Baryshnikov.) Mr. Marian Ladre (1903-1983) was born in Poland and studied ballet and folk dance there before joining the Ballets Russes.

The part I deleted is italicized above -- it seemed like this was info that might be more appropriate to an article about the Ladres themselves rather than Reinking.--NapoliRoma (talk) 13:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Reinking invented raising the roof?

[edit]

Anybody got a source for that? I can only find links to the 1:50 mark of the 1982 movie Annie, but the the credit would go to Arlene Phillips, who choreographed the film. Yes, I know imdb isn't a good source for the article, but it's good enough to have this odd trivia removed from wiki. GreaseballNYC (talk) 21:07, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In Regards to the Academy Awards

[edit]

I certainly believe that this is an encyclopedic source and shouldn’t be treated as a fan page; conversely, I would argue that it shouldn’t be used to slander someone either. This event description has been going back and forth for a while now, particularly in its addition of hostile and biased language. I personally don’t even see how this event is significant, much less anyone’s reaction to it.

1.) Similar “incidents” are not included on other people’s pages. For example, John Travolta’s ‘Adele Dazeem’ incident at the 86th Academy Awards, or Russell Crowe’s performance as Javert in Les Miserables, or Lady Gaga’s controversial performance of a selection from The Sound of Music at a recent Academy Awards.

2.) This performance being good or bad had no visible impact on her career. The very next year she was playing the lead in a Broadway musical and performed at the Tony Awards. She has had a very successful career since then as well, which includes winning Tony and Olivier Awards. Perhaps if this performance was a catalyst for something bigger then I could see how it would be relevant, but that really does not appear to be the case.

3.) I’m also not sure where the idea is coming from that this is in any way being treated as a fan page. There are no other reviews of any of her performances, nor anything that would indicate a bias.

Hopefully we can reach a consensus.

Pastabeans (talk) 18:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Slander is a ludicrous term to use. There's no slander (which means defamation), just a statement of fact that the performance was lip-synced (which is properly sourced) and very poorly received by independent sources and by the song's original performer (again, properly sourced). No slander whatsoever. If the problem is with the heavy use of quotes, which I can understand, then I removed the actual quotes to achieve a better consensus and merely put the reaction to the performance which is fully sourced. The notability is the fact that it was an infamous performance at a major event of a very well known song. The fact that you think there is any slander to this concerns me because it means you don't understand the meaning of the word. Rodericksilly (talk) 19:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited this passage to achieve a better consensus, softened language used (though properly sourced) while maintaining encyclopedic accuracy regarding the reaction to this performance. Rodericksilly (talk) 20:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I'm just not understanding your implication of this event's significance, and I don't see why it needs to be here at all. Could you perhaps address why it is so important to include? Why is this, moreso than all the other similar incidents I noted above, so important? Pastabeans (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I could repeat myself (major event, famous song, very bad reception) but I can't see the point in arguing with you when you've clearly decided for yourself what YOU think and frankly, since you don't have the first clue what slander means, I wonder why you're worth even debating with. Rodericksilly (talk) 13:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will certainly admit that perhaps 'slander' wasn't the right term to use. This event did happen, but what I still don't understand is why, considering this performance - good, bad, or otherwise - had no further repercussions on her career, it is necessary to include. Again, performance reviews, even those from major events, are not usually included in wikipedia articles at all unless it was the beginning of a much larger and more significant outcome. And I don't see this in any way as an argument, and I hope that it doesn't come across that way. I, and am sure you as well, simply want to create the best possible wikipedia article. Pastabeans (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would consider it as similar to music acts who give bad performances at major events. A typical example is Led Zeppelin at Live Aid. They were really bad at that event. Has that changed their position in rock history? Not really, but people remember it and it has become part of the story and is fully documented for that. When a musician, actor, dancer, whatever, gives a very poorly received performance at a major event in front of an audience of millions, I would expect that to be recorded on Wiki, not airbrushed. Rodericksilly (talk) 18:00, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - I definitely agree that things should not be airbrushed. Perhaps a better place for this story would be on the page for the song itself, though? I think that’s where people would look to find it, anyway. Pastabeans (talk) 13:57, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think a cursory mention on this page, which it now is, and a more detailed appraisal of the event on the song page is appropriate. Rodericksilly (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my line of thought is this: I’d say it’d be better there because we do both seem to agree that, despite not changing her career, it plays a role in the narrative of the song. So I’d say a good compromise would be to have it not in her career section, but on the page about the song. And again, I think if someone wanted to know about that event, they’d look on the song’s page, not hers. It seems a little random here, especially considering that it’s not part of a more ongoing story. Pastabeans (talk) 14:10, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can see your point of view there, but having dramatically reduced it already and removed the quote-heaviness, it doesn't seem overbearing to me now to mention she performed the song and it was badly received. I shall expand mention of this to the song page though. Rodericksilly (talk) 17:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I think we’re about at a compromise. I may still play around with it a bit just to try to find a better flow. You can keep an eye on it if you want and let me know if you see a problem or anything. Pastabeans (talk) 14:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ann Reinking. 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) 14:04, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ann Reinking. 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) 15:40, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Romantic relations as career choices?

[edit]

Don't you think it's more appropriate to put these facts in the section about Ann's personal life rather then in the career section?

During Pippin, she came to the attention of the show's director and choreographer Bob Fosse. Reinking became Fosse's protégée and romantic partner, even as Fosse was still legally married to (though separated from) Gwen Verdon at the time.[9] ... In that year (1978), Reinking and Fosse ended their romance and separated.[11][12] However, they continued to have a professional, creative collaboration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.91.245.206 (talk) 01:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sad

[edit]

Ann reinking died 109.144.218.192 (talk) 09:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I loved her 109.144.218.192 (talk) 09:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We call peppa pig at 3am (she came to my house)😞 109.144.218.192 (talk) 09:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ann_Reinking&oldid=1200692637"