Talk:Carousel (film)

Untitled

A question - why is it that, on the film infobox, you can type in only a certain amount of information? I have been trying to add more. AlbertSM 19:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Carousel film 1956.jpg

Image:Carousel film 1956.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 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 20:07, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heavenly Guide

I have removed the reference to Billy's Heavenly Guide being changed from a woman to a man. This is incorrect, as anyone who reads the cast list of the original production (on the Internet Broadway Database) can tell you. In recent productions, the guide may have been changed froma man to a woman, but in the original Carousel, it was a man.AlbertSM (talk) 00:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed one of the references to Alfred Newman. There is too much mention of the orchestrators, almost as if one of the posters had a special interest in "playing up" that angle. AlbertSM (talk) 23:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 October 2024

It has been proposed in this section that Carousel (film) be renamed and moved to Carousel (1956 film).

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Carousel (film) → Carousel (1956 film) – Partial disambiguation not justified. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:45, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Completely justified as the overwhelming WP:primary topic among films titled Carousel, averaging over 200 views per day this year, compared to 8 for all 3 other films combined. Someone landing on this title almost certainly wants to read about this famous film, and there's a hatnote for the extremely rare reader who somehow winds up here by mistake. Station1 (talk) 01:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
25:1 is actually rather low as partial disambiguation standards go (but not unheard of), even ignoring WP:PRIMARYFILM. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:16, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - This is close, numerically speaking. Certainly it's the most primary topic, but it's not so clear-cut as to be an obvious justification for partial disambiguation, especially considering WP:PRIMARYFILM. That said, the main reason I'm inclined to support the move is that including the year in the title is expected, clarifying, and useful, without being unduly distracting or unwieldy. Clear improvement to my eyes, subjectively, which tips the balance as concerns whether its sufficiently primary. Garnet Moss (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – Let alone the ~19:1 combined pageview ratio, long term pageviews show that the pageviews for the other three films are practically nonexistent. This is pretty much a justified WP:PRIMARYPDAB and WP:PRIMARYFILM. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 21:22, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, the 1956 film is the primary topic, per the above comments. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:51, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. While it is the very clear primary topic for films called Carousel, it is still only partial disambiguation, as to disambiguate with "film" implies it's the only film called Carousel. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]