Talk:Ruritanian romance

message: The Ruritanian Romance was NOT a genre of a historical fiction.  They depicted actions contemporary to the authors; that the genre has become historical does not make them historical.  Goldfritha 00:43, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical

message: Is this article exclusively about books, novels etc, or can we include opera and operetta libretti?  One of the best known examples is the operetta The Merry Widow, which involved people from the fictional Grand Duchy of Pontevedro.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:09, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: NOT really - although there may be a kind of indirect link (many operettas, going back at least to The Goldoliers, are set in fictitious countries) this article is really about a genre of popular novel. It is perfectly possible that writers of Ruritanian novels have an operetta in mind rather thn a novel when they conceive their works? Do we need a note in this article about operetta plots? (Have to keep it short and general or we'd be getting off topic - not to mention taking care to avoid the pitfalls of OR). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 07:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly The Merry Widow is closer to a Ruritanian romance than a satire such as The Gondoliers.  Obviously, anything added to this article needs to be cited to a source that specifically discusses its relationship to the genre of Ruritanian romance.  The last thing the article needs is more OR.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:30, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Apart from the "fictitious country" and "ruling class/royalty" elements there is very little to tie The Merry Widow to our genre (as Ssilvers himself points out, many ordinary fairy stories have as much as that!) - whereas the Goldoliers has several elements common to later (prose fiction) works in the genre - just to mention the most obvious, the idea of an uncertain or disputed right of succession between two "brothers" (often, as in this case, not real brothers at all, but occasionally twins!) of disputed, uncertain, or mistaken identity. OR of me, but I honestly suspect this is a Gilbertian invention, at least I know of no other, earlier canditate. I must reluctantly agree however that the original article (not, in this case, anything to do with me) neglects to give its sources, and somebody needs to go back to square one and do a proper survey of "the literature" - so that contentious statements can be properly cited. Like justice, verifiability must not only be done, but be seen to done. All else confusion, I suppose. Assuming this particular article is really worth rescuing in this manner at all. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 01:57, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: On reflection, we need to to point out that this is an article, as the first sentence of the lead makes clear - about a genre of popular prose fiction. Logical and obvious connections and similarities (in both directions!) between the basic idea of a Ruritanian novel and traditional fairy tales, operettas, children's movies etc. is really another kettle of fish about which we could, I think, make the odd brief comment, so long as we remain aware that they are not actually strictly "part of the subject of the article as defined in its lead". I would personally class "there is a typical Ruritanian villain in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" with "there is a wolf in the story of Little Red Riding Hood" - or even that "Paris is the capital of France" as something that does NOT actually benefit from a reference, reliable or otherwise. Just makes us look stupid in fact. Actually READ the lead to WP:OR Mr. Ssilvers!! It would be quite different if we drew inferences or speculated about causes or consequences, but just reminding people of facts that they can so easily verify (just read the book/story look at the film for yourself!!!) - does not in itself require a "reference to a reliable source". In the light of this - remarks about the Goldoliers probably DID need to go - but the "no references" tag is at best rather unkind. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 03:59, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The purpose of the tag is to attract editors who may be able to help reference the article. It has nothing at all to do with kindness. What makes us look stupid is having an article that is largely unreferenced. This article really sucks.  You didn't write it, so I have no idea why you are (indefensibly) trying to defend it.  I have started a discussion about this below. -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is that this is a little unkind, not that reference tags are inherently so. Actually have a look at the references that are already there, I don't think, on having a closer look at these, that we are being entirely fair. In this case the odd "cn" tag on a specific point (if you can find one!!) may be more constructive. Especially in light of my other remark above about "patently verifiable, even without a reference" type statements. Without which, incidentally, articles on literary and musical subjects would be impossible.  --Soundofmusicals (talk) 06:44, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Operas, operettas etc

message: Wouldn't Chitty Chitty Bang Bang's Vulgaria be another example of this genre?  --Studio 126 (talk) 23:57, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Find a WP:Reliable source that says so. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: See above. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 04:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chitty Chitty Bang Bang...? 

message: The reference tag was removed.  Obviously, this article is full of unreferenced information.  I have added requests for citations. The tag, it seems to me, is more efficient in attracting a potential editor who might be able to help with this terribly underreferenced article.  I would rather that the tag be replaced instead of all the little requests for references. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:44, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, so it may not be the best referenced article we've got, but do we really need to tag every (or, indeed any) detail of the plot of a novel, film or opera that can quite easily be read or viewed by anyone wanting to verify it? Do we insist on this with synopses of the plots of operas or musicals? Or that there is a region in the Balkans called Ruthenia? A fair bit of "Paris is the capital of France" in your latest plethora of tags, I feel. As I said PLEASE re-read WP:OR, in particular the lead thereof. It is actually more sensible and less dogmatic than you seem to be assuming. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 06:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The section "Other Ruritanian settings in fiction" does need either an "unreferenced section" tag, or a citation-needed tag on each claim, and the citations need to use the term "Ruritanian" in regards to the piece in question. Also, the tagged points in the rest of the article need citations as well. If the claims hold water, it should be no problem to Google the titles (in quotes) and the word "Ruritanian" and find suitable citations. Otherwise, this article is becoming an bit of an uncited WP:COATRACK. If any title does not hold water and no citation is found for it being Ruritanian, it can go in a See Also section. Softlavender (talk) 07:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

text: *I took Soundofmusicals's good advice and "re-read WP:OR". I then looked at each and every  tag, ready to remove any or all that came close to the "Paris is the capital of France" line. I have removed none because I can't see any that are so clear-cut that they do not need citations. Soundofmusicals, could you highlight here which of the statements which carry cn tags you think are in the same area of "Paris is the capital of France"? - SchroCat (talk) 07:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

text: *I'll also add that I tend to agree with Softlavender in my preference for section or article tags, rather than having to drop  onto every line. However, as they are there now, they are useful in identifying the sheer volume of unrefernced material that needs support from a reliable secondary source. - SchroCat (talk) 07:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, the IMDB is not a reliable source.  If something is a Ruritanian Romance, some reliable source, like a newspaper review or book about theatre, film or literature, will say so. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:48, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of reference tag

message: If (and only if) these can be reliably cited in the article, they might qualify as Ruritanian:
*La Grande-Duchesse de Gérolstein. This seems to be a yes: , . 
*Professional Soldier (or its source story, "Gentlemen, the King!" by Damon Runyan). Judgement call; the location is Ruritanian, but don't know if the plot/whole is. Here is Graham Greene's film review in The Spectator: . An Australian newspaper headlines its review/notice of the film "Ruritanian Romance and Crime Thriller": .
*The Great Race (the major part of, in the kingdom of Pottsdorf). This seems to be acknowledged as merely a parody of The Prisoner of Zenda. 
-- Softlavender (talk) 08:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a book by Vesna Goldsworthy called Inventing Ruritania: the imperialism of the imagination (Yale University Press, 1998).  That should have a lot on this subject.  There may also be other useful references in the also under-referenced article Ruritania. -- Ssilvers (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  For your consideration 

message: There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding false accusation of edit-warring. The thread is Ursula LeGuin.The discussion is about the topic Ruritanian romance.   Thank you. loupgarous (talk) 00:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formal notification of Adminstrative Appeal re: [[Ruritanian romance]] edits. 

message: The Tintin book King Ottokar's Sceptre is set in the fictional Balkan country of Syldavia, and is all about a plot to force the king to abdicate by stealing his symbolically essential sceptre.  Eastern Europe, adventure/intrigue, centred on royalty, defeating an attempt at usurpation.  But no romance (I don't recall a female character at all), and it's about preserving the rightful king rather than restoring him after usurpation.
Searching for sources:
* http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Ruritania (another wiki and thus not "reliable")
* https://florianbieber.org/notes-from-syldavia/why-syldavia/ (hardly stellar, but a named author)
* https://novobyzantium.blogspot.com/2011/03/imaginary-enemies.html (equivalence implied but not explicit)
* https://in.pinterest.com/pin/173107179401346635/ (explicit, but awfully brief)
* https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/apr/29/eu.politics4 Ah, that looks good!
* http://hilobrow.com/2013/11/21/war-ruritanian/ Another good one!
71.41.210.146 (talk) 04:16, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also Syldavia 

message: I’ve read this book, and I don't understand how it qualifies as Ruritanian Romance. Timothy Schrock2001 (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Mask of Dimitrios. 

message: Can this term be applied to anime, manga, and Japanese fiction in general, which uses fictional countries with early 20th century culture for adventure-political plots? Gundam and his clones, Spy x Family, Witch Izetta. In my non-professional opinion, these anime largely copy elements of Ruritania, such as aristocratic intrigue, idealized European aesthetics from the First World War, and the classic use of fictional countries to avoid political consequences. Finally. it's not uncommon for anime to copy various eras of western fiction to create settings, you can already find gothic anime copying Victorian themes or fantasy anime copying chivalric romances. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional European countries in Japanese fiction