Talk:Arms and the Man/Archive 1

Added film
Added film, as I saw link. Suspect it is film of the play, though it is unclear as the title appears to be reverted to the original. If someone could find out would be good... There was a 1932 film too, according to IMDB Justinc 20:55, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I hope I've been able to clarify this. &lt;KF&gt; 21:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

plot tag
First of all, do not remove a cleanup tag until you address the concerns of the editor who placed it, unless it's been used as obvious vandalism somehow. That's just rude. Second, a plot section should concisely summarize (i.e. a brief statement of the major plot points) not recount the entire plot moment for moment. That is too long. I'd be happy to clean it up/rewrite myself but I've been a little busy. However, that doesnt change the fact that the plot section is overly long. FYI: you might want to read the links to wikipedia policy referring to the cleanup, especially before you delete it. VanTucky 16:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

type of play??
How and why is this play considered a "lacuna?" I can't find any explanation of how that term can be used to describe a play. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.76.84 (talk) 03:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I don't understand what lacuna means in the first sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.245.167.72 (talk) 18:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Agree. I've replaced the word 'lacuna' by 'play'. Ioan_Dyfrig (talk) 21:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Second thoughts: have reinstated the descriptioon 'comedy' which was recently replaced by 'lacuna' for some reason. Ioan_Dyfrig (talk) 22:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Who is Nicola?
In the plot summary, towards the end, we're told, "Nicola quietly and gallantly lets Sergius have her, and Bluntschli, recognising Nicola's dedication and ability, determines to offer him a job as a hotel manager." That mention of Nicola is the first time his name comes up. He must have snuck into the plot at some earlier point, yes? Magpie54 (talk) 20:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Inaccurate discussion of musical adaptation: The Chocolate Soldier
This article's discussion of the adaptation of "Arms and the Man" into the operatta "The Chocolate Soldier" was seriously misleading, beginning with its description of how Shaw "sold the rights". In fact, to his later regret, Shaw refused in advance to take any money from the musical adaptation at all. I have replaced the entire section about the adaptation, borrowing heavily from the Wikipedia piece on The Chocolate Soldier, which gets the key elements of this story correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Menna Elsawaf (talk • contribs) 12:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)