Talk:Steel Magnolias/Archive 1

message: The name of the character played in the film by Shirley MacLaine is "Ouiser", not "Ouisa". In the film, she is addressed one time by her "proper" name, Louisa, but otherwise, it is "Ouiser". This spelling is used by IMDb , IBDB  and in the original play. Rockhopper10r (talk) 15:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ouiser

message: I've been a Wikipedian on-and-off for a couple of years, and make mostly random edits.  About two weeks ago, I read this article and thought that one of the larger subheadings was blatant advertisement.  The 'area in question' is almost as long as the total synopsis of the film/play!!!  
It reads Once the primary filming location of Steel Magnolias, the Steel Magnolia Bed & Breakfast now operates full-time in Natchitoches, Louisiana. With a distinct Southern feel and hospitality found greatly appealing to both fans and non-fans alike, hundreds of guests have appreciated a stay in this highly-rated bed and breakfast. To this day the house has retained almost all of its charm with rooms named after the major characters from the popular film. Marketed with reasonable prices to the public, the bed and breakfast has won many awards over the years for excellent service and the overall enjoyability of the entire experience. For more information visit the Steel Magnolia House online at www.steelmagnoliahouse.com.
Seriously, is someone going to say that this is encyclopedic???  I didn't just delete it, though, because I thought it might be of some interest to those who use Wikipedia instead of Wikitravel to plan their trips to Louisiana...  I synthesized the paragraph into: The primary filming location of Steel Magnolias became a full-time bed & breakfast in Natchitoches called the Steel Magnolia Bed & Breakfast.
I put that in the Trivia section and felt that that was an acceptable compromise.  But, I looked back a week later and my edits had been undone.  Ok, so I redid them, only for them to be undone 6 hours later and have my edits be labeled "vandalism," even though I personally don't see the vandalism in said edits.  So I request comment on which version should be in this article.  Not just that, but also whether or not it should be it's own subsection or a bullet within the Trivia section.  I would inform the other party of this RfC....but it's a different (random) IP address each time!  Thank you. User:jg325 Jg325 (talk) 01:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you did the right thing: the B&B development is aaaaarguably notable as a trivium, but it shouldn't have its own section, and that section as it now stands is pure advertising. Calling your good-faith edit vandalism was inappropriate. Iralith (talk) 22:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I made the fix you suggested. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC: Is this advertisement?

message: An editor has noted that "Trivia sections are discouraged" and invited us to combine the trivia with the relevant sections of the article. I would be glad to do this; however, I note that none of the trivia are sourced. I am inclined to delete the whole section unless those who added the trivia (or anybody else) also tell us from where they got the information. The Trivia section is so trivial as to be really un-encyclopedic. I propose eliminating it as violative of this guide: "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information." See WP:Not Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that.  Since this article is about the play and the movie, I think trivia is especially out of place.  Trivia sections can sometimes be woven into an article's backstory about a movie or a play, but this trivia isn't particularily compelling even if it is sourceable.  Jacksinterweb (talk) 21:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: There is an interesting and mildly amusing page at WP:NAM, and particularly at WP:NAM#Disagree_respectfully that might be of interest to people editing the Steel Magnolias page. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No angry mastodons 

message: I think this has been up long enough without a citation that it should be removed. Is there a standard for how long something like this is allowed to stay?
Dosbears (talk) 23:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  off-Broadway revival of the play is being planned for August 2009? 

message: Should this page be split into one for the film (here) and a new one for the play, perhaps at Steel Magnolias (play) - AKeen (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Page for the Play 

message: So, the two big paragraphs on diabetes and pregnancy don't really belong in this section (or even really in the article at all). A sentence or two and a link to the wiki page on diabetes that should contain this info is more appropriate.72.89.142.185 (talk) 17:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the content about diabetes and pregnancy does not belong in the article so I removed it. This article is about the movie, not about how it is wrong about whatever and may mislead a viewer. If certain people take a fictional movie's word on a medical condition, I doubt they're reading much of anything to begin with.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.241.28.1 (talk) 03:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Box Office Section - Diabetes Info