Talk:Mary Poppins (film)

message: "The film received 13 Academy Award nominations (it shares this record with Gone with the Wind, From Here to Eternity, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Forrest Gump, Shakespeare in Love, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Chicago, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button; only All About Eve and Titanic have received more nominations, 14 each) and won 5 awards."
The film can't "share a record" of 13, when said record appears to be 14, as the latter part of the sentence says.  If you really want to include all those titles, perhaps ...
"The film received 13 Academy Award nominations (equalling the nomination totals of Gone with the Wind, From Here to Eternity, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Forrest Gump, Shakespeare in Love, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Chicago, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.  Only All About Eve and Titanic have received more nominations, with 14 each.  Mary Poppins won in five of the categories."
 WHPratt (talk) 16:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statement needs some work ... 

message: I am thinking about splitting off the soundtrack as its own article, but looking for opinions first.  There is a lot of material (much of which is unsourced content about unused songs), that I would hate to just remove.  At the same time, there is so much that it is overwhelming the main article in my opinion.  Does it meet the criteria for its own article?  Thoughts? BollyJeff | talk 00:32, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: ?? BollyJeff | talk 01:42, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey B. I think you have a point and you should proceed as you think fit. You can always work on it in user space - I'm sure you know that so apologies for stating the obvious - until you get it where you like it. I know specific talk pages are not watched as avidly as they used to be so you can always post a thread at the filmproject pointing to a specific thread like this one to get more input. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 02:39, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soundtrack article 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mary Poppins (film). 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090208011732/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/BasicSearchInput.jsp to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/BasicSearchInput.jsp
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6XjARCjVO?url=http://www.wga.org/wga-awards/previous-nominees-winners2.aspx to http://www.wga.org/wga-awards/previous-nominees-winners2.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A requested move related to this topic has been requested at Talk:Mary Poppins (musical).
-- 67.70.34.69 (talk) 07:09, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: A move request related to this subject (2018)

message: It is bizarre to me that a movie as iconic as this not only has incomplete information in the plot summary (Including missing mentioning the most important song from the film "Chim Chim Cher-ee" where it appears, as well as "Sister Suffragette", "Pavement Artist", "Stay Awake", and "A Perfect Nanny") and also is fiercely defended whenever anyone tries to correct this. It seems logical to want to have all the songs in their proper place. Either we have all the songs in the plot summary or none, otherwise it just makes no logical sense to only have a few and exclude all the rest. Other live action musical films like "The Music Man" and "Hello Dolly" have ALL their songs in their proper places in their articles. Furthermore the songs that are there already all should be linked to their pages (for all have pages except "Pavement Artist"). Even when I tried to do that it got reverted. What is going on? EEBuchanan (talk) 09:20, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The song titles get in the way of the prose and make the reading ever-so clunky.  Why can't they be inserted elsewhere?  And I would not compare the quality of this with the "quality" of Music Man.  That article is awful. CassiantoTalk 09:58, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well if that's the case why are there any at all? That's what I was saying - if they are going to be there they should all be there. Otherwise none of them should be there. There were some there beforehand, you see. I only added the 5 that were missing. EEBuchanan (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I would take them all out.  Can't we have a new section that lists all the songs and have a brief synopsis of each, who sung them and in what scene? That is far better than cluttering up the plot.  CassiantoTalk 11:37, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The plot is already a bit longer than it should be according to WP:FILMPLOT.  There is a link in the Music section to a separate soundtrack article which has all of the songs. This section could be expanded a bit, but I would not include all of the songs there either. Bollyjeff | talk 00:55, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

text: The plot section is not for extended, detailed descriptions of the plot. Rather, the plot section must be a brief description covering major points. The guideline at WP:FILMPLOT caps the section at 700 words. I use the online tool https://wordcounter.net/ to help me with plot length – there are other online word count tools as well. The FILMPLOT guideline is why I have reverted several of 's recent plot expansions. Binksternet (talk) 00:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

text: I'm not against listing songs in the plot. There's long history of songs listed in that manner, predating Wikipedia. But the song titles are counted as part of the plot size, so the descriptive text would have to be reduced in order to fit the songs. Binksternet (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genuinely confused? 

message: "In addition, Disney was then known primarily as a producer of cartoons and had yet to produce any major live-action work."   Uh, what about Disney's big-budget and Oscar-winning 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea in 1954???   The poor guy couldn't get Hollywood to respect him in the 1950's and 1960's, and still today on Wikipedia apparently. 24.96.118.204 (talk) 05:53, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In context, this meant in the 1930's, when Disney first tried for the rights. Not the 1960's, when Disney finally got them. $chnauzer 06:41, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disney "had yet to produce any major live-action work"?