User talk:Kjwhaley

Welcome!

Hi Kjwhaley! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful: Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here: Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here: Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 11:37, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tips

Here are a few helpful links for newcomers:
Wikipedia:Reliable sources, WP:V, WP:CITE and WP:NPOV
How to edit a page; How to develop articles; Editing tutorial
Manual of Style; Writing better articles
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Editing by consensus – working well with other Wikipedians

In addition to the links above and in the Welcome message, if you have editing or other questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page, you can sign up at the new users log, post a question at the Help Desk.

It is a good idea to read the most recent entries at the bottom of the Talk page of an existing article before making major changes to it, to see if your proposed change has been discussed before. Before I make a major change to an article, I often make a proposal on the Talk page to see if anyone minds.

Again, welcome! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:41, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of your edits so far, I really appreciate them! Kjwhaley (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Notebook

I see that you are interested in The Notebook (musical). I took a very quick look at the article. The synopsis section should be divided into paragraphs and should simply describe the events depicted in the musical. It should not contain "meta" information like "The show begins", unless the meta information is essential to the concept of the show, as in title of show. Just say what happens and is communicated to the audience. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:49, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips - revamping that article's summary section is on my to-do list. Can I substantially rework the summary without first discussing the changes on that article's Talk page? Kjwhaley (talk) 19:26, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, it is good practice to drop a note on the talk page and say, "I'm planning to do x to the article and should add the changes in [a couple of days]" (or whenever). But in this case, I wouldn't worry about it, because the current plot summary so obviously doesn't follow Wikipedia's usual style that the changes I described should be non-controversial. On the other hand, if you intend to do something specific, like, say, emphasize certain plot points that someone else might think are not essential to the plot, then you could mention it on the Talk page. Note that for musicals' synopsis sections, our wikiproject's Article Structure advice is as follows:

Divided by acts, the synopsis should be long enough to concisely convey the story-line, identify the primary characters and name the principal musical numbers. It should not be overly long or detailed nor include a scene-by-scene description. A two-act musical's synopsis should be between 800 and 1100 words, with leeway for an unusually complicated plot. ... [P]rovide context for the songs and ... name the principal musical numbers. If you change the plot summary to exceed 1100 words, please explain why on the Talk page under an appropriate heading. The Synopsis should generally be prepared using the musicals' script as a primary source. The essay on "How to write a plot summary" (WP:PLOTSUM) may also be instructive.

...The titles of the musical numbers should be "in quotes" per MOS:MUSIC. Musical numbers can be incorporated like this in two ways:

In parentheses:... Horace Vandergelder informs his two employees that a woman is essential to make a household complete ("It Takes a Woman"); or
Using the title of the number in a sentence: Horace Vandergelder informs his two employees that "It Takes a Woman" to make a household complete.

Note that the two methods can be used interchangeably in the same summary. ... [A] synopsis should not refer to the fact that a song is being sung or to mechanics of the play. For example ... "and then the curtain falls". An exception might be where the mechanics of the play are part of the story itself: For instance, in The Fantasticks, the narrator drops the fourth wall to describe elements of the play and to comment on it periodically.

-- Ssilvers (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I gave it a shot! Kjwhaley (talk) 22:18, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very good to me. Check out my edits to it; I moved one of the incidents slightly to simplify some of the flashbacking, but feel free to reverse that if you disagree. See also MOS:DASH – we use dashes instead of hyphens a lot. I prefer ndashes to mdashes. See also MOS:QUOTE – we always use "straight" quotes, never curly ones. Also see MOS:LQ, which was a style guideline that surprised me when I started working on Wikipedia. "Younger", "middle" and "older" versions are the same character, I think it's better to just indicate the timeframe. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:29, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There could be a paragraph describing the main differences between the film and the musical. See, for example Young Frankenstein. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:39, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar enough with The Notebook movie to get to that right away, but I could easily add a similar section to the Moulin Rouge page, do you think it might fit well there? Kjwhaley (talk) 07:53, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that is a good idea in developing nearly any article about a musical that was adapted from a notable film, novel, play, TV series, comic book series, fairy tale, biography (Hamilton) etc. (also for a film adapted from a musical). The key is to keep it concise and to focus on the most important changes needed to understand how the stage musical evolved artistically from the source material. For example, it is not important that a musical number was moved later in an act, rather, it matters that a change to the storyline required numbers to be moved, cut, written anew, etc. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the style guide tips!

I wasn't sure how to handle the character names - I think it reads better this way, but based my initial draft off of the summary for Fun Home, which has "Medium Allison" and "Small Allison" in the plot summary. Kjwhaley (talk) 12:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, both are legitimate ways to do it. If you feel at some point that it would be clearer to add back the Younger and Middle character descriptions, feel free (but in that case, I would add the parenthetical definition, the way Fun Home does). -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Headings, subheadings and paragraphs -- some thoughts

We mentioned headings elsewhere. The purposes of headings are to break up text, so that you don't have page after page of unbroken text, and to generate an outline-style table of contents. I'd say that, very generally, we should not have a full screen of text without at least one heading. On the other hand, generally, a section should not have only one little paragraph in it. Also, paragraphs are used for breaking up big blocks of text. A great paragraph has an introductory sentence, at least 3 sentences with examples, and a concluding sentence. Obviously, not every paragraph can be "great", but paragraphs should not be broken up into just one or two sentences if there is other related information that can be combined into the paragraph. Then, I'd say, a great section should contain 3-6 paragraphs. If you break up an article into too many sections and subsections, then the table of contents becomes useless, as it is too long to scan.

A heading should be followed by related information that is significant enough to the topic to warrant its own heading. For example, an original, long-running West End production of a musical for which we have well-referenced information about dates, noteworthy creatives, noteworthy cast, interesting production details ("the production was the first West End show to premiere when theatres re-opened after the Covid-19 pandemic closures."[WP:RS]]), would get its own subheading in the Productions section. But a regional or international production that has few really unique and encyclopedically interesting features described, should be combined in a paragraph with other regional/international productions under headings like "Other productions", or if there are enough of them, broken up into "Regional productions" or "Foreign productions". If it is a musical that has had numerous significant productions, these can be broken up by decades or other means. See, for example, Hair (musical), Carousel (musical), H.M.S. Pinafore, etc. I try to remember that "productions" is just one section of an article about a musical -- an encyclopedia reader should not have to wade through a whole bunch of trivia. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:29, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Cardoza (May 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by S0091 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Cardoza and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

S0091 (talk) 14:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kjwhaley! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! S0091 (talk) 14:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that you search for more articles that have significant coverage particularly about Cardoza. How about these, for starters?:

-- Ssilvers (talk) 16:01, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it mostly a matter of swapping out refs (maybe removing the podcasts?) for more Cardoza-focused sources or should I try to expand the article as well? Kjwhaley (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Use the best refs. If the podcast is a well-respected one, consider keeping it, but generally a print article from a reliable source will be better than a podcast (also, if you cite a podcast, note the exact time in the podcast that the person says what you want the reader to focus on). Should you expand the article? Only if you have something encyclopedic to say. Definitely it is good to include telling quotes by a couple of the most reputable critics about his performances or reputation as a performer. -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This says some nice things about him: https://latinheat.com/the-leading-latin-men-of-the-notebook-on-broadway/ -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:34, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]