Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Theatre

 WikiProject Musical Theatre Main Talk Page

Cast and awards tables: Persistent accessibility issues
I was encouraged to post here by another editor. Please note that per MOS:DTAB, all data tables must have MOS:TABLECAPTIONS and semantic roles for columns and rows. These are required accessibility features or (among others) the blind to use our site. Please include them in all tables and definitely never remove them when you encounter them. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I cannot disagree more strongly. Adding this redundant extra heading to these already bloated cast tables would not help visually impaired people in the least, because the section heading already alerts them to what is following and acts as this "caption".  So they are not "required".  If we want to improve the cast tables, I would suggest converting them all to the more concise style used in Carousel, which focuses on notable actors. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Disagree with what? That the blind don't need accessibility? MOS:DTAB is very clear:
 * Data tables should always include a caption.
 * What disagreement is there to be had in principle? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Just so everyone knows what, exactly, is being discussed, here is a diff where Koavf added a "caption" that he is advocating, in the musical Illinoise. He is suggesting that similar additional captions (besides the headings *and* table headings that are already there) must also be added to ALL the cast tables that exist in all musical and play articles. It is the second line here, "Overview of casts for Illinoise", but the caption is nonsense/redundant, as the table is NOT an overview, and obviously it's for Illinoise, as that is the subject of the article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Illinoise&diff=prev&oldid=1220439925

-- Ssilvers (talk) 16:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I concur with Ssilvers that the extra row with years is unhelpful clutter.  Tim riley  talk   17:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It is helpful to the blind and in no sense clutter. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It is required for all tables as per above. You also seem to not know that the table captions while the must be included do not necessarily have to be rendered. See sronly. Again:
 * Data tables should always include a caption
 * This is not optional. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Koavf until you can get consensus from other experts, we will not be implementing this. You are not the ultimate authority here. Experts who have engaged in this discussion have made it clear that this additional caption will clutter to the already bloated tables and will be unhelpful. Smitty1999 (talk) 21:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is consensus: it's in the MoS. See WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Please show me an "expert" on accessibility in this conversation. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I believe that Smitty means "experienced editors". I agree that no Wikipedian is an "expert" with respect to content discussion, including Koavf. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * And how did you discover that I am not an expert on accessibility? Is the past 20 years I have spent here not enough to be "experienced"? Is being an invited expert on the HTML5 Working Group not enough to be familiar with Web best practices? Please see that MOS:DTAB explicitly states that it is a consensus-built document, it explicitly states that all data tables need captions, and WP:LOCALCONSENSUS explicitly states that local groups of editors cannot "override" broader community consensus. Please tell me what I'm missing here. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * please see the above. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:51, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see that there is no consensus (in fact not a single person agreeing with you) to add the misinformation to the tables that you wish to add throughout Wikipedia's musical theatre entries that have cast tables. They are not "overviews", and they display only certain casts, as already captioned in the table headings. Please stop WP:BLUDGEONing this discussion. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * What “misinformation”? See that the MOS is a product of consensus and local consensus cannot override it. Again, what am I missing? If the problem is the content of the table captions, then make better ones, not delete them. All data tables are required to have captions, correct? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Cast tables issues more generally
See this edit, where someone else questioned the typical cast tables that are in many musical theatre articles. As I suggested above, it would be better to convert them all to the more concise style used in Carousel and The King and I, which focuses on notable actors. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * How is that relevant? ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC) You made a tangential subheading as I posted my comment. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I can agree with this partially. Classic shows like Carousel or The King and I have had numerous revivals. However, newer shows like The Outsiders or Illinoise don't have as many productions on their cast tables, so that is not necessary for the newer shows but definitely for the classics. Smitty1999 (talk) 12:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sure, some shows, like revues or unsuccessful regional shows, are unlikely to have numerous major productions, but both The Outsiders and Illinoise have just been nominated for multiple Tony Awards and very well could become ubiquitously popular, and so columns in the cast table are likely to get out of control, like at Moulin Rouge! (musical). -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ssilvers We can implement that if/when tables get too bloated. For Moulin Rouge, I do agree that since so many productions of it have opened in the last few years, then we should condense the tables but not necessarily for new shows. Once they have more than a few different notable productions, then we can condense the tables to what they look like on Carousel or King and I. Cabaret is another one that needs a condensing as it has too many productions. Smitty1999 (talk) 21:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * That is a workable compromise, though it makes more work when we have to, basically, do the table twice. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I can help if you need it. It's the little things we have to do to make them better. Smitty1999 (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If you have time, please go ahead on those two articles, and any others like them that you see from time to time, and I'll be happy to review if you ping me. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Certainly! Smitty1999 (talk) 22:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Ssilvers I made the adjustment to the table on Moulin Rouge! Can you review to see how it looks? Smitty1999 (talk) 22:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Please look at my minor edits and edit summaries. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I will start working on the Cabaret table now. Smitty1999 (talk) 03:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the concise tables are better and more user friendly. - SchroCat (talk) 13:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * May I just ask how to make a cast table for Frankenstein 2014 musical? There have been 8 productions so far, each with multiple actors in the main roles. EncreViolette (talk) 03:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Damian Hubbard from Mean Girls
I've created Damian Hubbard about the fictional character from the film Mean Girls (2004) and subsequent adaptations, including the musical and 2024 film. Hoping some project members might be able to expand the article further re: the musical production. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 23:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft article: Can someone please review?: Draft:Masi Asare
Hi. I am copying this request here from the COTM talk page, which doesn't get much traffic. I hope someone can help this editor. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Wrote a new article for a Harvard-educated, Tony-nominated musical theater writer Draft:Masi Asare. She's the only writer of Paradise Square who doesn't have a page yet, and she's done a lot and has been covered fairly widely. I'm hoping this is a slam dunk that's not hard to get approved. So, if anyone has permissions to move articles to the mainspace, please let me know if there's anything I can do to get this article going. Thank you Wikipedian339 (talk) 21:02, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Musical Theatre in Japan and Korea (and elsewhere)
Hello, and nice to meet everyone.

I am a fan of theatre -- musical and otherwise -- and I live in Tokyo. I've noticed a shocking lack of information about modern theatre in Japan and Korea on English Wikipedia and on English sites in general. I've been trying to translate as much as I can and share information, particularly regarding shows that I'm a fan of, but I'm willing to help spread the word and translate about anything from Japanese (I don't know Korean or other languages).

There are hundreds of musicals that have premiered in Korea and Japan over the past few decades that are mostly unknown to English audiences.

I haven't created any pages yet. Would it be okay to create draft pages about musicals? Major ones, like Frankenstein, Fan Letter, Isabeau, Smoke...

The pages for Theater of Japan and Theater of Korea need major rewrites. Nothing modern is even suggested there. Very few major actors and almost no composers have pages.

To translate a page of an actor or a production from the Japanese Wikipedia site, what needs to happen, if there isn't a page at all in English yet?

I'm sorry for the newbie questions. I just want to know if there's anyone interested in improving coverage of these topics.

Thank you. EncreViolette (talk) 16:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Glad to have you aboard. Yes, by all means, create draft pages for new articles that you are confident are WP:Notable, and an easy way to start is to translate entries from Japanese Wikipedia that we do not have here.  The reason that English Wikipedia does not have a lot of coverage of musicals first created in Asia is simply a matter of not having a lot of people who have chosen to work on that in the past.  BTW, There is already an article called Frankenstein – A New Musical. Is that the one you mean? English WP has several other musicals articles based on Frankenstein, so check that before you start one.  Please try to keep your Talk page comments more compact, like mine. Before you do a major re-write on an existing article, I would suggest going to the Talk page of that article and starting a new discussion about what you are planning to do.  Then wait a few days to see if anyone has any objections or suggestions about how to proceed.  Feel free to ask me questions on my Talk page about editing content. I am always happy to copy edit and explain content rules like WP:RS, WP:DUE, etc. Others are probably better at technical stuff like how to work in Draft. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:39, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reply.
 * That is not the same Frankenstein musical. There have been at least 4 in the past 15 years. The article Frankenstein in Popular Culture has a note about the Korean one, but it has no article yet.
 * Regarding notability -- There is a news source called Stage Natalie. It covers stage plays from all producers, but I'm not close enough to the industry to know how independent it is from the producers. Should I make sure to find one more article besides that about any production to consider it notable?
 * Thank you.
 * EncreViolette (talk) 02:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * A notable production will normally have some combination of a notable director, notable leading actors, notable writer, lyricist and/or composer, and run for a long period of months or years. It will normally be reviewed by the major news sources that review theatre. If a play or musical has productions on Broadway or in the West End it is usually notable, but if it plays only in Japan, say, it should have a lot of the indicia of notability that I mentioned above before it could be considered notable. Start with the most notable, starriest, longest-running, most reviewed productions first. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Plays don't run for a long time in Japan and Korea, that isn't the business model. Even the most notable productions have pre-defined limited runs, sometimes of under a month. Video recordings are also far more common in Japan.
 * This is what I'm asking. The notability guidelines basically say that if there are articles about a work or a person, not just the work's own promotional materials, then that is enough to make it notable. Stage Natalie is a main news source that covers theatre. It's not the only one, but it seems to me to be the biggest one. What does something need to be notable, other than having neutral articles about it?
 * Another question: When is it worth making a separate page about a musical that is an adaptation, as opposed to having a section in the page for the original work?
 * There is a Category:Japanese Musicals list that is horribly incomplete. About a year ago, I tried adding pages of the source material of certain musicals (such as Cesare (manga) (why doesn't that article have the series' full title as its title?)) and those got cut from the page because the main topic of the article isn't a musical. Your Lie in April has a page. Is it okay to make a page for musicals that are adaptations? It'd be hard to argue that the Cesare musical isn't notable.
 * EncreViolette (talk) 02:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * You wrote: The notability guidelines basically say that if there are articles about a work or a person, not just the work's own promotional materials, then that is enough to make it notable." Well, the guidelines say that, at a minimum, you need multiple WP:Reliable sources that provide significant coverage, and they also say that notable topics have at least national coverage, if not international coverage. But even if you found a couple of sources, you should also consider whether this play/musical has been revived in significant productions.  If a play only plays once, at a provincial theatre for a few weeks with a non-notable cast, why is it of encyclopedic interest?  A really notable play will be reviewed by all, or at least most of, the major newspapers and news services that carry theatre reviews. You might want to put this on your watchlist for a few weeks: WikiProject Deletion sorting/Theatre to see what sorts of theatre articles get deleted for lack of notability, and which ones survive.  Then, as I said, start working on the very most notable ones first. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Again, you're applying New York and London standards to a different place where the standards are different.
 * If an actor is already considered notable enough to have an English wikipedia page, is that enough to make the production notable?
 * Tokyo and Seoul are not provincial. EncreViolette (talk) 03:43, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * No, definitely not enough by itself. Again, look at the indicia I posted above.  Would User:4meter4 or someone please comment on these questions? -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I read through the list of which articles have been kept and which deleted. The productions I'm talking about are definitely notable enough. I'm not talking about one notable actor. I'm talking about a full cast who, if they had pages in English, those pages would be kept. Lots of search results, coverage about them. Lots of coverage of the productions as well. Official sites come up for the first few results, but there are news articles after that. How are the sources in this draft -> Draft:Frankenstein (2014 musical) Are those sources enough?
 * Thank you for your time.
 * EncreViolette (talk) 04:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * One should not be so shocked that things in the encyclopedia are not complete or not written about in English Wikipedia. Is the article you are shocked not to see in the Encyclopedia Brittanica? I doubt it. If not, it is not shocking at all.  Further, this is a volunteer project.  People work on what they know about or what they wish to research.  Very often, subjects in predominantly non-English speaking countries are sparsely covered until someone, like you, with an interest in covering them, comes along.  On the other hand, sometimes people come along who insist on writing about non-notable topics, and they are frustrated to see all of their efforts eventually deleted. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * To answer your question about adaptations, compare Back to the Future with Back to the Future (musical), a recent adaptation of the first. The musical has played on both the West End (for almost 3 years so far) and Broadway (1 year so far), with notable creators, director, designers and actors, and so it is independently notable. The opposite case can be seen at Sense and Sensibility, where a musical adaptation has not been deemed independently notable, even though it was internationally revived and had a notable director.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I am commenting because I was pinged. In terms of notability, WP:SIGCOV is our guide. If multiple independent sources with significant coverage exists then we can have an article on a given work. It’s as simple as that. A production does not necessarily have to have a long run, or a bunch of famous people in its cast to be deserving of an article. There are many failed shows for example that have received lots of in-depth coverage because they were significant flops for example, and likewise there have been critically acclaimed works that ran for a short period (particularly in opera which is expensive). The only thing that determines whether or not we can have an article on a stage work is the sourcing. If you have a minimum of three sources with in-depth coverage on a play/musical than it should pass an AFD. The main thing that I would look for is the type of sources. Works covered in books, journals, etc are likely notable. Works with only media coverage may or may not be notable. If the only independent sources are reviews then there needs to be some analysis of the quality of those reviews. If the reviews are all small local outlets it probably isn’t notable, but if it’s had wider regional and/or national coverage or been covered in a notable theatre magazine/journal than it probably is notable.4meter4 (talk) 07:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note, however that that guideline specifically says, right near the top of that section: "...significant coverage in reliable sources creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article. A more in-depth discussion might conclude that the topic actually should not have a stand-alone article—perhaps because it violates what Wikipedia is WP:NOT, particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information." That means that you need significant coverage, but also the thing itself needs to be of encyclopedic importance.  That is why you also need other indicia of notability, such as having notable people involved, and/or a long run, and/or a major-market production, and/or multiple revivals, and/or an occurence of historical significance (a king is assassinated, the theatre burns down, or the roof caves in during the opening), and/or some other indicia of notability.  In most cases, having several notable people involved helps. -- Ssilvers (talk) 08:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much. So, if if it was produced in a major theatre in Tokyo (and, usually, had a national tour), it's been written up by Stage Natalie, Musical magazine, and one or two others, and at least one person who already has a page is involved, does that mean I don't need to worry about whether or not it's notable?
 * I think these would be likely to be notable. I would expect to see some criticism from mainstream Japanese media like newspapers in addition to those types of sources or even television news as well. The Japan Times has a stage section for example for theatre reviews. If it hasn't been reviewed in at least one of Tokyo's major newspapers it probably isn't notable. 4meter4 (talk) 15:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This is what I'm saying. Theater reviews aren't as much of a thing here as they are in New York and London. The same systems don't apply everywhere. EncreViolette (talk) 15:27, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @ I just pointed you to The Japan Times which has an entire section of its website dedicated to theatre reviews in Tokyo. Hiroshi Hasebe is one example of a notable critic that writes for Japanese language papers. There may not be the volume of criticism that happens in the west, but there certainly are working theatre critics in Japan. I notice that many of the Stage Natalie entries lack an attributed author, which means their content may be non-independent and more akin to a press release. That is an issue. Without press coverage with a bylined author it’s going to be difficult to assert that sources are sufficiently independent to justify an article. I would suggest concentrating on creating articles on stage works that have been reviewed by a named author in a minimum of three different publications (magazines, newspapers, etc), otherwise they are not likely to survive an AFD unless there is some sort of other high quality source like an academic journal article or book from an academic publisher. This may not be what you want to hear, but it is what WP:GNG requires (ie three independent sources) for all articles regardless of context/topic area. That is the governing guideline for all articles.4meter4 (talk) 06:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * One more question: Adding proshot information to musicals that already have pages. Is that alright? Should I format it the way the casts are formatted on the Frankenstein page? I know there was a discussion that not all casts are notable enough to be listed on the page. Are proshot casts notable enough? EncreViolette (talk) 08:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Another question. I see that the page for Hakataza says that it's a stub and needs more information. Would listing proshot recordings filmed there be appropriate? I know the 2023 Elisabeth was filmed there. It probably wouldn't be hard to look up more. It's the last stop of a lot of national tours (and about half of the major Tokyo productions tour). EncreViolette (talk) 10:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * One more question... I've always been frustrated that the page for Mozart! has so little information. Is it accurate to think that that's what's called a "stub" and that drafts need a lot more than that? (I would have added to that page a long time ago, except I'm not really a fan of that musical and I don't think my knowledge is accurate.) EncreViolette (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)