Wikipedia

Talk:Annie Get Your Gun (musical)

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Baseball Bugs in topic Title
Learn more about this page

Punctuation Error

edit
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Why are there quotation marks on characters' names? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.108.122 (talk) 07:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)Reply


Poster

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Why is the Bernadette Peters 1999 poster in the "original production" infobox? AJD 17:11, 21 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Good point! I replaced the 1999 image of the album cover with the image of the 1946 cast album, thereby giving Merman her due, I think. Kept the 1999 image and moved it to the section on revivals--since the show won 2 Tonys, I think it deserves an image.JeanColumbia 12:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

You've made good progress on this article. I made some edits. As usual, I think the film ought to be split off, since it is notable in its own right. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 17:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I like the edits, except that I'd like to see the several paragraphs on the 1999 revival kept together more prominently, or be set off more. Not sure how to explain this, but I wonder if the casual reader won't get a bit lost.JeanColumbia 18:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree. I'm going to do it now. Conversely, I think the film info is too prominent, since it now has its own article. I'll fix it. -- Ssilvers 22:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Film split

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I was thinking of it, the film probably could use a separate article, it certainly has an interesting history. I added a "split film" template, to (1)elicit comments (2) perhaps get someone to volunteer to do the split (3) remind me to look at this. (No time now to do all of the work involved with a split.)JeanColumbia 18:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm about to split the article, making a separate article for the film. Should things look a bit off for an hour or so, hopefully all will be properly in place soon. (I post this as a precautionary note, in case things go awry, I'm not vandalizing but trying to do a legitimate split.)JeanColumbia 20:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC) Seems to look ok so far, I'll do the "what links here" shortly.JeanColumbia 21:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yay! You're the Top! (oops! wrong show!) -- Ssilvers 22:05, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Walter Havighurst and his book

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I have serious reservations about todays (May 22, 2007) edit regarding the basis for this musical, as follows.

A recent edit states that the musical "Annie Get Your Gun" was based loosely on the Walter Havighurst book, "Annie Oakley of the Wild West". The book was written in 1954. The musical was produced on Broadway (opened) on May 16, 1946--8 years prior to the publication of the book which is supposedly the basis. Something is not right here. I am sure of the date of the opening of AGYG. A Google book search shows "snippet" views but not the book itself, but references are to the year 1954.

Clearly this claim --that the musical was "based loosely" on this book --needs to be looked at very closely and researched further. In my opinion, unless there is further reference, the claim should be deleted or at least tagged in some way (I am not very familiar with Wikipedia tags). JeanColumbia 00:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Addition: nowhere in this background of the musical [1] is this book or its author mentioned.JeanColumbia 00:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

ROTFL!!! That's funny! Various sites say that the musical is based on the book (see here and here and here (there are lots more!), but you have caught them all with their pants down (unless they have a time machine). -- Ssilvers 02:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I had seen those sites. I can't imagine what has happened to cause this reference, but I think you took the right step in deleting. (I think this discussion can stand as explanation for the future, should it ever come up again.) JeanColumbia 11:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Annie Merman.jpg

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Image:Annie Merman.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 13:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Potential Plot Summary Edits

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I think the plot summary could be more accurate, especially regarding song placement and chronology. If no one has any significant objections, I would like to edit it.(MarianKroy (talk) 19:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC))Reply

I certainly have no objections, would welcome it, in fact. I wrote a very early edition of the plot, completely from memory (did not want to risk copy vio by referring to anything), based on several viewings of the 1999 revival. It could especially use, as you mentioned, song placement, also a bit more fleshing out, especially the scenes with Annie & Frank. JeanColumbia (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ok, edits are done (but under my URL, not my username, because I forgot to log in), and I hope they're satisfactory. They're based on the 1966 revised book, which is very similar to the 1946 revival with the addition of "An Old-Fashioned Wedding." I am in a production of Annie Get Your Gun, and that's the version we're using, so all my edits should be pretty accurate. I don't want to shortchange the 1999 revival, though. Perhaps its section could be legthened. MarianKroy (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Nice work. I wikified the section a little and formatted it. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Article assessment

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

With more background information, this article would approach B-class. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

File:Jane-Horrocks-and-Julian-Ovenden-in-Annie-Get-Your-Gun.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
  An image used in this article, File:Jane-Horrocks-and-Julian-Ovenden-in-Annie-Get-Your-Gun.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Merger proposal

edit
Latest comment: 12 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to leave the articles as they are without merging. MarianWilde (talk) 15:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have proposed that Annie Get Your Gun (Doris Day and Robert Goulet album) should be merged into this article. My rationale is:

  • Major recordings are typically listed as part of an article about a musical.
  • The Doris Day and Robert Goulet album is already mentioned in the Annie Get Your Gun (musical) article in the recordings section. It would be easy to merge a few relevant sentences from the current article Annie Get Your Gun (Doris Day and Robert Goulet album).
  • Popular musicals are recorded and performed frequently, but not every recording or performance is notable enough to receive its own article. According to WP:Notability (music), an album "requires its own notability" and "That an album is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is not by itself reason for a standalone article". Even though Doris Day and Robert Goulet are well-known actors, the album appears to be just another version of Annie Get Your Gun, and in my research concerning musicals, I don't think I've seen in mentioned once. I think a few sentences in Annie Get Your Gun (musical) is the level of notability it warrants.

I'm more knowledgeable about musical theatre history than I am about albums in general, so I could be overlooking something. If anyone else has an opinion, I'd like to hear it! MarianKroy (talk) 05:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I would *not* merge it, as long as the album was reasonably successful (though I would not have been in a hurry to create it either). These were not just "notable musicians", they were huge stars who were brought together especially for this album. Further, it was not merely an obligatory cast album, but a special recording of the musical with a unique cast. There is nothing wrong with having the album's own article, with all the information in it, and mentioning in WP:SUMMARY form, a brief description of it in the main musical article. Also, this album was apparently the first stereo recording of the show. I know that this sort of album article is done in plenty of other cases for musicals. Compare, for example, Hair (musical)#Recordings and Hair (Original Broadway Cast Recording). The article about the recording can contain some unique content like reviews of the recording and more information about sales figures, promotion or whatever is available about the album that is too much detail for the musicals article. See this about the later reissue. Doris Day recorded the song "I Got The Sun In The Mornin’" three times: with Les Brown in 1946, in 1960 for her solo album Show Time and finally for this album. Gramophone liked the recording, and Allmusic is so-so about it, but you can say that John Kenrick (theatre writer) hates this album. See THIS! Note that this Musicals101 article discusses the major albums that should be mentioned in the main article, though I wouldn't bother mentioning the London Records studio album or the 1986 West End album. BTW, I am not watching this page, so if you want me to come back here to see more discussion, please ping me on my talk page. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:27, 23 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
I think Ssilvers has some valid points in favor of keeping both articles without merging, and since no one else seems to be interested in commenting, I am going to close the discussion, with the result being that both articles are kept as seperate entities. MarianWilde (talk) 15:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
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.
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Annie Get Your Gun (musical). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Annie Get Your Gun (musical). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:23, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Title

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It would be interesting to verify that this play's title was inspired by the old saying "Johnny get your gun", which appeared in various songs and plays starting in at least 1882. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Annie_Get_Your_Gun_(musical)&oldid=1198776883"