Talk:Monte Cristo Jr. (Victorian burlesque)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Bensci54 in topic Requested move 15 April 2024
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | On 15 April 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Monte Cristo Jr. to Monte Cristo Jr. (Victorian burlesque). The result of the discussion was moved. |
Plot summary needed edit
A brief plot summary section is needed to move this stub up to "Start" class. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:50, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Requested move 15 April 2024 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Monte Cristo Jr. → Monte Cristo Jr. (Victorian burlesque)
- Monte Cristo, Jr. → Monte Cristo Jr. (musical)
– Whether there is a comma before "Jr." is a triviality, and in any event the image shown for the burlesque contains a comma and the one for the musical doesn't. Neither seems to be the primary topic, so disambiguate both. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- User:Pppery, I would support if you revised your request to make it Monte Cristo Jr. (Victorian burlesque) AND to remove the comma before Jr. in the musical. I would probably put the comma in the Meyer Lutz piece, even though the Brits don't like the comma, generally, but I don't feel strongly about that. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- I am fine with both of those changes. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Would you please either edit your request above or re-propose so others and easily see what is being proposed? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Would you please either edit your request above or re-propose so others and easily see what is being proposed? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- I am fine with both of those changes. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above: Although a Victorian burlesque was also a type of musical (or at least proto-musical), this seems a reasonable way to disambiguate by genre. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Monte Cristo Jr. (1886 Victorian burlesque) and Monte Cristo Jr. (1919 musical). Clearly extremely ambiguous. A comma is no disambiguation at all. But I think the years will make it absolutely clear which is which since both were musical productions. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Fine with me. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Adding the years is not necessary and would not be helpful. There were no Victorian burlesques after 1891, and it is not a good idea to identify musicals by year: do we mean the year of composition? publication? premiere? first major production? most important production? I think the current request above is crystal clear in disambiguating them. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Given year of release is how we disambiguate films I fail to see the issue! "Victorian burlesque" may be an adequate disambiguator, but "musical" certainly is not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- As you note, a film has a year of release. However, plays and musicals are often published long before they are ever performed, and the original production of a stage work might be in a tiny production, on one night, with an audience of four. Then it gets played at a slightly larger theatre in Podunk, then in an established regional theatre, and finally bursts on the scene in a Broadway or West End production, which is the only production that everyone later remembers. Indeed, many, many shows have had brief regional, touring, or off-Broadway tryouts before their big Broadway premiere. So it is not comparable to films. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- However, this one, apparently, did not! It opened in 1919, closed in 1919 and never appears to have been produced again. So I repeat, I fail to see the issue. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- As you note, a film has a year of release. However, plays and musicals are often published long before they are ever performed, and the original production of a stage work might be in a tiny production, on one night, with an audience of four. Then it gets played at a slightly larger theatre in Podunk, then in an established regional theatre, and finally bursts on the scene in a Broadway or West End production, which is the only production that everyone later remembers. Indeed, many, many shows have had brief regional, touring, or off-Broadway tryouts before their big Broadway premiere. So it is not comparable to films. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Given year of release is how we disambiguate films I fail to see the issue! "Victorian burlesque" may be an adequate disambiguator, but "musical" certainly is not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:41, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Adding the years is not necessary and would not be helpful. There were no Victorian burlesques after 1891, and it is not a good idea to identify musicals by year: do we mean the year of composition? publication? premiere? first major production? most important production? I think the current request above is crystal clear in disambiguating them. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ssilvers, above. I also find the use of the date potentially problematic for the reasons outlined (given we're not talking about a film, the comparison is not a suitable one). The stage works in, and is perceived in, very different ways. - SchroCat (talk) 15:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes to the move; no to adding the date, for obvious reasons. Tim riley talk 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
UTC)
- As the creator of the article, I support Yes to the move; no to adding the date. Jack1956 (talk) 05:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.