Agranat2

Topics

Check Wikipedia and cross those topics off the list that already exist. Of those topics that remain, carefully think about which ones will likely be verifiable and notable, i.e., those that people in the media or in the academy will have commented on. If no topics remain on your list, go back to the drawing board. You may find it useful to go back to the stubs on Wikipedia. With my permission, a stub can be the basis for an article, but be careful—they might be stubs because people can’t find sources.

List of Possible Topics

The Rules for Living, play

1. Shades of Grey by Jasper Fforde X
2. Desert Rain Frog X
3. Moone Boy, TV Show X
4. Bill Hader, actor X
5. David Sedaris, writer X
6. Mushishi, manga X
7. Amulet series X
8. Wigfield, book X (Stub)
9. Citizenfour, movie X
10. Much Ado About Nothing, Joss Whedon (2012) X
11. Wayward Pines, TV show X
12. Chuck, TV show X
13. Firefly, TV show X
14. Eureka, TV show X
    

Once you’ve chosen the topic you want to pitch to the class, provide a rationale for why the topic belongs on Wikipedia in a sentence or two.
The Rules for Living by Sam Holcroft
The play is not only entertaining and relatable, but also, it discusses different viewpoints on cognitive behavioral therapy, making it a much deeper read than one would expect. With that said, you don't even realize you're learning because of all the family drama and action in this comedy.

Why do you think it’s notable enough?

While the play is relatively new, there are a lot of reviews written about it and the playwright.

Who do you think has written about it?

Critics, professors, journalists

Where will you find these sources?

Simple search on the web drew up several newspaper articles. Also, links from the Royal National Theater.

List other possible resources.

• NT podcasts
• scenic designer of show (any production members really).
• Brian Walters, Deputy Literary Manager of the NRT
• Twitter: @NT_PressOffice
  
• Bedlam, card game
• Melanie Fennell, Overcoming Low Self-Esteem- a self-help guide using cognitive behavorial techniques
• Bulleted list item

List other possible Wikipedia pages that you might be able to link to from your article, e.g., in my article, I could link to Slate magazine, the hosts of the podcast, and a public radio station. Post answers to your User account talk page.

• Cognitive behavioral therapy
• Sam Holcroft
• Royal National Theater
• Miles Jupp
• Claudie Blakley
• Deborah Findlay
• Marianne Elliott
• Neil Austin
• Bedlam
• Nick Hern Books

—————————————————

Other sources to look at: Adrian Sutton

• Ian Dickinson
• Kate Waters
• Jeannette Nelson
• Melanie Spencer
• Maggie Service
• Daisy Waterstone
• Stephan Mangan
• Chloe Lamford

Article Preparation: The Rules For Living

Most of the articles I've found on plays seem to take the following form:

• Brief Synopsis, which covers the plot of the play in a concise paragraph without really spoiling anything.
• Plot, which goes into detail on the course of the play, and, in case it went through major revisions between performances, lists these two. Each act generally gets two, three, or even four paragraphs for itself.
• Characters, which goes into the backstory, and motivations of each character, and, if any of them have a notable line or soliloquy, (like Lucky, in Waiting For Godot) this is also described. Even characters who do not appear, but are mentioned, such as Rosaline from Romeo and Juliet, are included here.
• A "History of the Play" section, which describes the inspirations and writing of the play, as well as any things which the playwright might have been going through at the time.
• The Original Cast, almost always names only.
• Reviews, both positive and negative. Also, any serious dramatic criticism it garnered. If reviews improved or worsened in the weeks after opening, this should be noted too, as well as the reasons for it.
• If the play is old enough, a list of significant revivals is included, each with its own cast list. DFNO1997 (talk) 04:44, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_Wedding

While this article has some problems with verification and too long of summaries, I think that this has a nice sections/subsections that could help us build this article. I think it would also be important to add a little bit about the context in which this play was written maybe? -Characters -Plot summary broken down into acts/scenes -Adaptations -Broadway or production history -References Kkartaly (talk) 20:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC) -Sources -External links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkartaly (talk • contribs) 20:21, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, all,

Hope all is well. I updated the Critical Review section. If you would not mind all taking a look at it and looking at how it is structured to see if it fits within notability and verifiability...

Also, I was looking at the references and it looks like some citations need to be fixed.

I fixed the link for Munchkin and added a link for Ackyhom Horror.

Do we want to add what role each actor performed? I tried looking it up online, but could not find any character list. Those of you who have read the play, this would be helpful! Kkartaly (talk) 19:31, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Rules for Living

Rules for Living is a dark comedy play, premiering in 2013, about family dysfunction and societal norms by Sam Holcroft. Holcroft explores coping with family dynamics and social constructs that limit behaviors through cognitive therapy.

Plot

• Detailed overview of each section of the play
• Facts as they are presented

Act 1

Scene One

Scene one starts off with Matthew and Carrie talking. Matthew can sense that Carrie is upset with something. He pushes for her to say what is on her mind. Carrie says she thinks Sheena faked laughing at her joke. Matthew explains that it was sincere. Carrie asks what she shouldn’t say to make Matthews family upset. Matthew tells Carrie to be less vulgar. Carrie overacts and is angry at Matthew at the end of scene one.

Scene Two

In the beginning of scene two Matthew and Carrie make up. Carrie discloses to Matthew that she is just nervous about being with his family for the Christmas holiday. Shortly after they are joined by Sheena, and Sheena says there is still more to be done in preparation for dinner. Sheena and Matthew share jokes which makes Carrie uncomfortable for not being in on the jokes. Near the end of the scene Sheena discloses that she would rather be in this household for Christmas than her own household.

History of the Play

• Brief description of production run; where at, how long, etc?
• Why was it performed at each location?

The debut performance occurred at the National Theater in London on March 24, 2015. DFNO1997 (talk) 15:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC) This run ended on July 8. DFNO1997 (talk) 16:11, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

The most recent performance as of this writing was staged at Red Stitch Actor's Theater in St. Kilda's, Australia, and ran from March 2017 to mid April of that year. DFNO1997 (talk) 16:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Cast

Miles Jupp

Claudie Blakley

Deborah Findlay

:Maggie Service Kkartaly (talk) 16:18, 12 April 2017 (UTC) :Daisy Waterstone Kkartaly (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC) Stephen Mangan :Stephen Mangan Kkartaly (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Critical Reviews

Summary of the main reviews:

Matt Truman's Variety's review of the March 2015 production at the National Theatre in London believes that the music in the production is executed well with the play. At times, however, some of the play's interactions are too deliberate on set. Trueman interpreted the play as a "seriously canny satire." Truman states, "Holcroft not only ridicules our perfectionist culture, but shows the neurosis beneath and lets us feel the stress of its feedback loop ourselves." http://variety.com/2015/legit/reviews/rules-for-living-review-national-theatre-london-1201459882/

Michael Billington's review of the National Theatre production notes, "Like Ayckbourn’s Season’s Greetings, the play confirms that Christmas is often a cue for self-revelatory crisis.... this is an intelligent comedy that leaves us questioning at what point the rules for living we all adopt become a form of entrapment. Kkartaly (talk) 14:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Bridget Galton thinks that the play could use a "rethinking." Galton saw that Holcraft seemed "ambivalent" towards Cognitive Behavioral Theory, but the execution could have been different. Galton states, "And while there are sharp jolts of comic recognition, there is also rampant overkill." Kkartaly (talk) 14:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC) Kkartaly (talk) 12:47, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Cameron Woodword a reviewer for The Age (Melbourne, Vic.) states that the play is "wildly funny...domestic comedy in the mould of Alan Ayckbourn's Seasons Greetings.

Kkartaly (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Dominic Cavendish, reviewer from The Telegraph reviewed the Dorfman Theatre production. Cavendish pulls out the "Ayckbourn-esque drama" of the performance. Cavendish states, "Rules for Living at times borders on being the funniest and truest comedy I’ve seen in ages, but it’s also the strangest and most strained. It shouldn’t really work at all. That it does, just about, is a testament to the talented array of actors." Cavendish picks up on themes of Cognitive Behavioral Theory. Cavendish states, "A serious theme about Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, and the way we get stuck in and must break free from negative patterns of thought. The contrivance, observed by us, not commented on by the players, embodies a painful, dysfunctional reality.

Kkartaly (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Kate Herbert of Herald Sun reviews thought it had an Aychbourn-like feel and explored the Cognitive Behavioral Theory in Holcroft's play. While the complex characters were apparent on stage, Herbert states, "if the performances were reined in, the more complex issues of the dynamics of human behaviour might be clearer in Rules for Living, but the more reflective moments of the final scenes in this three-hour production come too late." Kkartaly (talk) 11:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC) Kkartaly (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Kkartaly (talk) 11:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Cameron Woodhead from The Sydney Morning Herald wrote a positive review. Woodhead states, "Kim Farrant directs a strong ensemble with verve, allowing mayhem to develop from naturalism that's attractive and sharply grounded in familiar typologies. And the way she can puncture the hilarity with moments of poignancy... – really raises the theatrical stakes."http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/stage/melbourne-stage/rules-for-living-review-family-tensions-bubble-over-in-wildly-funny-christmas-drama-20170321-gv2ov0.html Kkartaly (talk) 11:52, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Natasha Tripney of The Stage notices the Cognitive Behavioral Theory as well. Tripney states, "But despite that late, delicious eruption of anarchy, there’s something rather laboured about the production as a whole – its tread is heavy." https://www.thestage.co.uk/reviews/2015/rules-living/ Kkartaly (talk) 12:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Integrating sources together--feel free to look at and alter if you feel like it should be something else!

Many of the reviewers noticed that Holcraft's play dealt with comedy in a way to reveal a larger theme about family disfunction and how people cope with living as well as the Ayckbourn-esque feeling as viewers (Head note--does anyone know how to do that? I am struggling with this). For example, .... Kkartaly (talk) 12:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Some reviews, however, noticed that the reflective moments "came too late" or the play was "tread heavy" (Is this the correct way to incorporate sources? Can I use two different sources here?) Kkartaly (talk) 12:42, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Scenic Design

(Don't know if we need this, but the scenic designer had a big role in the original production.)

Annotated Bibliography

• Look through these reviews/videos and begin to pull information.

"Sam Holcroft (U.K.)." AO International. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.
This source gives us some background on the playwright and how she develops her stories. Agranat2 (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Billington, Michael. "Rules for Living review – Mangan and Jupp are a joy." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 25 Mar. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2017.
This review gives a fairly positive response to the first performance of the show. There is some major bias thought because it is the critic's personal point of view. Agranat2 (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Trueman, Matt. "London Theater Review: ‘Rules for Living’." Variety. N.p., 25 Mar. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2017. Trueman states, "Imagine Alan Ayckbourn clawing his fingernails down a blackboard; that’s Sam Holcroft’s “Rules for Living.”" This negative review points out all the major flaws in the writing and production of Rules for LivingAgranat2 (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

https://audioboom.com/posts/3093955-marianne-elliott-and-sam-holcroft-on-rules-for-living
Interview with the first production director, Marianne Elliott, and playwright Sam Holcroft. They talk about the process of getting the script on its feet and how the show came about. Agranat2 (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-reviews/11490360/Rules-for-Living-Nationals-Dorfman-Theatre-review-It-shouldnt-really-work-at-all.html

This speaks to the cognitive behavioral theory and how it was perceived which increases notability on the topic of cognitive behavior theory and notability on a different perspective. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/24796262-rules-for-living

I don't know if I would use this as a source. Thoughts? Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't sure myself, but I put it on the list for everyone to get more background on the text. We should probably remove it later on. Agranat2 (talk) 15:20, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/comedy-festival/comedy-festival-2017-red-stitch-theatres-rules-for-living/news-story/b8d0847a29d36b01da1456fe4a6696fb

This is another theatre review that increases notability on the comedy aspect, but also speaks to the cognitive behavioral theory in the play which increases verifiability. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/stage/melbourne-stage/rules-for-living-review-family-tensions-bubble-over-in-wildly-funny-christmas-drama-20170321-gv2ov0.html

This article will help in the critical review for perspectives, verifiability and notability. It will shed light on another perspective, thus proving another verifiable source, but it will also show notability because this is another reviewer that sees the comedy within the play. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10FocFrR4R4
This is an interview with the playwright. This interview is good for verifiability especially with a direct source with the writer. This may be good for context and understanding the playwright better with her motives towards writing. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/entertainment/theatre/theatre-review-rules-for-living-at-dorfman-theatre-1-4016627
This review will help with verifiability in the critical response section of the Wiki page because it explains how the play was received with a specific reviewer. This will engage in verifiability because it is information that can easily be challenged with different reviewers. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://bs6vx4ge6d.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tensions+boil+over+in+farcical+Christmas+drama&rft.jtitle=The+Age&rft.au=Cameron+Woodhead&rft.date=2017-03-22&rft.pub=Fairfax+Digital&rft.issn=0312-6307&rft.eissn=0312-6307&paramdict=en-US
Who got this source as well?I tried clicking on the link to see how it would relate, but it goes directly to a request for interlibrary loanKkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1688042336?pq-origsite=summon
Who got this source? I tried clicking on the link to see how it would relate, but it goes directly to the database and not the article. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

https://www.thestage.co.uk/reviews/2015/rules-living/ This article is a review by The Stage, an organization established in 1880 dedicated to theatre, reviews, and performing arts. This article states that this play's "tread is heavy" and while this "play is intriguing it has a sitcom feel" (which does not feel like a compliment here). This could be used in the review critical response sectionKkartaly (talk) 20:56, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

http://thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366(15)00229-1/fulltext This is a scholarly article that discusses the summary of the play, but also how psychiatry "gets more and more fetishized in popular culture and the arts" and how this play "fails to come down on one side or the other" with explanations of course. This could be an interesting for criticism and themes/contexts. Kkartaly (talk) 21:08, 9 April 2017 (UTC) This will increase verifiability and notability. Kkartaly (talk) 13:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Bedlam

Card game

Link to Sandbox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Agranat2/sandbox