Talk:Chicago (musical)

message: I removed the mention of shows in the West End that according to the dates mentioned no longer would going on at this time. One should be careful when listing dates in an article that a play or musical is expected to run till since readers may read the article after the dates mentioned and before the dates info can be updated to reflect past tense. --Cab88 19:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of future dates 

message: I was wondering what peoples thoughts were on replacement casts. I know that wicked has a complete history about who replaced whom and when. The pop stars that have played in Chicago have been mentioned in past iterations here. What's relevant and what's not when it comes to replacements? Is it worth mentioning celebrity replacements over regular cast turn over? I know there are hardcore Chicago fans who pay attention to who comes and goes in the chorus. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jadenbobaden (talk • contribs) 00:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know who wrote the questions above, but my opinion is that the *Principal* cast lists of expecially notable productions can be given, but not chorus or understudies.  For other productions, it is sufficient to list, in the narrative, the most notable actors.  This show is a little different because of all the celebrity casting, but the table that is there is a pretty good idea.  The only thing I wish it showed was dates when these people appeared in the show.  -- Ssilvers 17:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Replacement Casting

message: Having seen the show and bought a programme in London this past week, the synopsis text looks to be pretty much word-for-word what's in the programme.--FleetfootMike 08:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Was this updated and fixed? Or is the synopsis still very similar to the playbill? Go-editors (talk) 03:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poss Copyright violation 

message: Did some major edits to the page, hope they are all okay :-D. All the information is still there except for the following
Bob Fosse was romantically involved with the original Roxies of both Broadway versions.  He was married to Gwen Verdon when she originated the role.  While still married to Verdon, Fosse also romanced Ann Reinking, who would later choreograph the revival (one of Fosse's roles in the original) as well as play Roxie.
I wanted to get rid of the trivia section and this was the only piece I couldn't fit back in. So I decided to leave it here incase anybody else would like a shot at it. Cheers! --omtay38 05:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved a shorter version into the revival discussion.  Note: all the headings should start with a capital letter but then have all small letters - sentence case; not title case. I'll give this a more thorough review another time.  Why is the Act 2 summary so short? -- Ssilvers 04:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the copy-edit! Actually, that's about all that happens in Act 2 without getting too wordy. It might do with a little more, but i'm goin to bed for the night. Although, I'm actually quite fond of this synopsis. It's a very good demonstration of how concise a synopsis can be. :-D --omtay38 05:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Revamp 

message: The section appears to be WP:OR.  Do you have any citations for any of these assertions?  If not, a song list, showing which character sings each song, would be preferable, as it can be sourced by IMDB. -- Ssilvers 13:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I gotta take a look (i've misplaced my script) but i believe many (if not all) of these are noted in the script itself. Or how bout this: do you know of any libretto sites online? --omtay38 16:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, no I don't.  Would they would give free access to a valuable copyrighted property like this?  -- Ssilvers 17:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I found a reference for some of the songs' allusions to vaudeville acts and added that.  We could probably use more. --Thomprod (talk) 15:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

text: As a side note, Sergeant Fogarty is the name that Kander & Ebb gave to the police officer in "Funny Honey"; he as billed as such and is never referred to as "Inspector," so listing him as such would technically be incorrect. 150.108.232.74 (talk) 04:09, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Musical analysis section

message: Here are some comments, as requested at the Project tasks page.  I looked at most of the article and made some minor changes, adding a reference to the Playbill longest-runs information and some bluelinks, adding a little historical information and deleting some repetition.  It is a nice article, but it obviously requires all the assertions to be referenced.  -- Ssilvers 17:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, in the Famous Actors table, can you indicate (maybe with footnote numbers?  or else row indications on the left?) which production each person was in? -- Ssilvers 03:45, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't quite understand how to read the Famous Actors table. It would be nice to have some indication about how the table is organized, and as to why several names (Jennifer Ellison as Roxie Hart for example) appears multiple times in the same column.  67.80.94.119 (talk) 23:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: :Image:Chicago--A-Musical-Vaudeville-CD-Cover.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 11:16, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Chicago--A-Musical-Vaudeville-CD-Cover.jpg

message: That table doesn't seem to make any sense.  I know this has been brought up before, but I'm wondering what can be done to/for it.  It's essentially a bulletted list of people who've been in the show.  Can we find some way for it to impart actual information?  — MusicMaker5376 15:38, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's entirely WP:OR and/or WP:POV anyway, not to mention a disorganized, hard to interpret list of cast members, not casts with nearly all the productions unlabeled.  There seems to be no standard for notability, making it a catch-all for any cast member from any production anyone's heard of and entirely unsourced other than one or two sources that verify a given performer was in a given production.  I can't see any argument for inclusion, and have removed it entirely. Drmargi (talk) 11:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable cast table 

message: The Synopsis section seems well-written and very concise.  I can't find any copy-editing faults with the rest of the article.  Perhaps this has been accomplished and the point can be removed from the "to do" list? --Thomprod (talk) 15:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  To-do list:  Copy edit request 

message: Below information was unsourced for well over a year. Please feel free to reincorporate into the article with appropriate references. The sourced information has been retained. Doniago (talk) 20:22, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced Information 

message: A series of articles under this topic have been nominated at The Today's Article For Improvement project. What we do is organise collaborations between editors whereby each week we focus on bringing an article up to GA/FA. Please head over there and support (or oppose) the nominated articles.--Coin945 (talk) 08:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some exciting [[Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Nominations#Arts|TAFI]] news! 

message: I just added a paragraph on the original Australian production to the Productions section. I put this as its own section given its status as a major production early in the musical's life, pre-dating the wave of international replica and other productions following the 1996 Broadway revival. Boneymau (talk) 04:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  1981 Australia 

message: Dear 110.22.196.247, I noticed you removed a large paragraph on the 2017 production of Chicago. It wasn't a "school production," and it was actually importance info. Thanks. Heliozoan (talk) 00:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't tell if this production is with student actors or not, but the paragraph needed to be trimmed of peacock language and non-notable people. Leschnei (talk) 01:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance of the removed paragraph