Talk:Challenge square dance

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Challenge square dance article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Dance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance articles

WikiProject Dance To-do list:

To nominate at WP:FAC:
To improve to Featured standard:
To nominate as a Good article:
To expand: 18th century dance - 20th century ballet - Bolero - Choreography on Broadway - Dance education - English ballet - Indian classical dance - Italian ballet - List of dance companies - Meg Stuart - Opera ballet - Sasha Waltz - Scotch reel - Set dance - Physically integrated dance
To cleanup: Contra dance - Salsa (dance) - Dandiya - Lead and follow
To unbias:
To check for copyvios:
To merge: List of dancers and List of dance personalities‎ as per AfD discussion
Substubs needing expansion: see /substubs
To destub: Amir Hossain Babu - Canada Dance Festival - Dance etiquette - Flash dance - more
Needing references: Chorus line - specifically verifying that each girl actually started out as a chorine
To create: Broadway dance - Country Western Dance International - Dance and cinema - Dance and society - German folk dancing - Latin swing - Post-structuralist ballet - Push (dance) - Salon dance - Shuffle dance - Swing boogie - World Dance Alliance - Xavier Le Roy - more
Wanted Pics/Graphics: Category:Dance articles needing images

two couple dancing

Someone added a section on Two Couple Dancing, but in fact, Two Couple Dancing is not Challenge Dancing. I think it is confusing to include it; people reading this article are trying to understand what is different about Challenge Dancing compared to regular MWSD, and Two Couple Dancing is simply not Challenge. This section makes it seem like it's an element of Challenge, like Phantoms or Distorted setups.

Historically, Two Couple Dancing has mostly been done at low-level dancing -- mainly at BASIC. This has not changed: most Mainstream and Plus dancers are familiar with Two Couple dancing.

Two Couple dancing can only be done in a more limited way at Challenge, where there are so many more 8-person calls, and where most Concepts cannot be done (because Phantom concepts are adding 8 phantoms to 8 real dancers, and Two Couple dancing doesn't even have the original 8 that are required).

The contributor doesn't even know that it's "Two Couple" dancing, not "Couple Dancing".

There is something new that has happened that correlates to the section. With the COVID-19 pandemic, all square dancing has naturally been shut down. Some people are now dancing Two Couple material over Zoom videoconferencing. And most people only have their mate at home, so they dance the Two Couple material with a ghost (like phantoms) couple in their kitchen. There are even single folks who join and must hallucinate three dancers.

However, that is not Challenge dancing. It is not using any Challenge concepts. It is not any Phantom concept or anything else in the Challenge program. And mainly, as always, the material is Basic, Mainstream, or Plus, and these ghostly dances are advertised for dancers ar that level.

What seems to have happened here is that some newbie here has just benn exposed to Two Couple dancing, in its COVID-19 makeshift Zoom fashion, and perhaps especially because of not even having Two Couples, figured this must be "Challenge". It is true that most participants find it difficult.

Btw, people are also doing variations where regular 8-person material is called to i.e, solo individuals over Zoom. That doesn't make it Challenge, either.

Perhaps someone should write an article about COVID-19 Square Dancing. Besides Zoom dancing, they could describe people who are operating video games as square dancing. I haven't bothered to witness it, but people are using Minecraft somehow. None of that makes anything Challenge either. Should be hung off a COVID-19 aticle, not the Challenge article.

Ballroom dancers will solo-dance with ghost partners for practice. That is not Challenge either. Musicians will play reduced orchestration arrangements. That's not Challenge.

Two Couple dancing is not Challenge, even over Zoom; and it nothing new. In fact, it is mostly done with beginner square dancers. Dicirnah (talk) 22:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

number of calls

The paragraph about the number of calls at various levels, as originally written, cited several numbers which were intended to represent cumulative totals (i.e., including lower levels), and did not cite a figure for C4. Somebody added a figure of 450 for C4, which in that context could easily be read also as a cumulative total. While 450 is probably high for the number of additional calls a typical C4 dancer knows, it is clearly too low as a cumulative figure -- this made it look like you only need to learn about 50 more calls beyond C3 to dance C4. I have replaced this with "at least 700", based on the "more than 400" in the previous sentence and the fact that some common C4 lists have 250-300 calls. (Note all these figures are for calls only, not concepts, since concepts are discussed in a separate section.) But the point of this change isn't the exact number, it is the incremental/cumulative distinction.

JWD3 (talk) 17:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the number that had been added previously was 350, not 450. Again, the point isn't the exact number, but rather consistency within the paragraph.

69.181.145.190 (talk) 18:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Challenge square dance. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]