Jump to content

Talk:Hairspray (musical)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Greetings

[edit]

hi —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.133.171.248 (talk • contribs) 14:38, July 14, 2007.

Hello --omtay38 19:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto production

[edit]

The paragraph about a possible Toronto production violates the principle that "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation" [1]. It also reads, as I mentioned in my edit summary, very much like a press agent (although perhaps a press agent would have more [insert your own word here] than to sound so --"fan"ish). Reference is obviously needed, I held my "delete" mentality in check, but I was sorely tempted. JeanColumbia 13:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I killed the rumor paragraph and a bunch of fancruft. Can we have a real plot synopsis and more good references instead, please? Also, do the Drama Desk awards belong in the infobox, Jean? -- Ssilvers 14:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oy indeed! Thanks for fixing the article, I really wanted to but...Yes, the Drama Desk awards belong in the info box. [2] I love this musical and if no one else gets to it, I'll a nice synopsis later. HON signing off for now JeanColumbia 14:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis added October 31, 2007 -- Copyright Violation

[edit]

The plot synopsis added on October 31, 2007, is a direct copy (with a few minor changes) from the web site: [[3]].

They include this statement on their web site:"Fair Use Notice This web site may contain copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This page is operated under the assumption that this not-for-profit use on the Web constitutes a "fair use" of the copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17, Chapter 1 , section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner."

From Wikipedia: "Do not copy text from other websites without a GFDL-compatible license. It will be deleted."

I conclude that using the plot synopsis from the allmusicals web site is a copyright violation and am therefore removing it and reinstating the previous plot synopsis. Should I be wrong and should there be permission, that should be noted here. JeanColumbia 08:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

November 4, 2007

[edit]
This copyright violation has once again been added to the "plot", and I am once again deleting it (along wth unneeded and unreferenced -- and in certain aspects, incorrect-- edits to the song list.)JeanColumbia 17:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum--the copyvio is a direct copy from: [[4]] JeanColumbia 17:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cast lists

[edit]

An editor deleted the cast/character lists and instead replaced them with a reference to the list of characters in a separate article. I have reinstated the cast/character list in this article, because I think the article should be a stand-alone, self contained "whole" set of information. It is more encyclopedic this way. In my opinion, the cast/character list is a very important piece of the information about a musical. The reader should not have to look elsewhere for the basic information. The reader might want more, and thus the additional listing (to which I have now provided a link) is great. Thank you, JeanColumbia 09:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with JeanColumbia's approach. -- Ssilvers 15:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hairspray (2007 film) peer review

[edit]

I just thought I would say that Hairspray (2007 film) is currently undergoing a peer review in hopes of further improving the article. Seeing as the film was based on this musical, I thought I would post here to let the regular editors of this article know that any contributions they could make would be more than welcome. Thanks! —Mears man (talk) 04:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plot -- copyright violation

[edit]

I thought the plot sounded "smooth"--well sure it did, it's copied from the offcial web site: [[5]]. I think I changed it enough so that it's no longer a copyright violation, but if no one else gets to it today, I'll review it again within the next few days.

And for anone who wants to do some reading, here is the Wikipedia policy on copy vio: WP:COPY

JeanColumbia (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I carefully read the plot write-up, and even after my rather minor changes (yesterday), I think it has too much of the plot writeup from the official site that I discussed here yesterday, and which is a clear copyright violation. Therefore, I reverted the plot writeup to the previous one, in existence just before the edits that created the copy vio. JeanColumbia (talk) 13:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have just finished writing a new plot synopsis. I wrote it from my memory of the two times I have seen the show (second time was just last week so was pretty fresh) and used my programme for the placement of the songs. Please edit if you can improve it and also some pictures would be very good too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark E (talk • contribs) 10:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely plot write-up, Mark E. I made just a few minor edits (one thing I tried to adhere to is the Musical Theatre structure format about no stage directions in the plot). I have no pictures. JeanColumbia (talk) 12:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those edits, much better now! :DMark E (talk) 13:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article progress

[edit]

The article is really coming along. If it had a critical reception section (and mabye some info about box-office), I think it would be B-class. Do any of the references describe the musical style? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added some critics quotes and some box office information. (That Variety Critics Taly (yes, that's what its showing on Lexis-Nexis) is really useful.) I'm not sure what to put in for descriptions of musical style, here are a few descriptions that might be interesting:
"Mitchell has done a remarkable job of varying the choreography, despite the repetitive sounds of rock 'n' roll, alternating with the rhythm-and-blues music of the period. One delicious number brings back a trio, reminiscent of The Supremes, preening their way in unison around the stage." (Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA)August 16, 2002);
"...retro R&B score by Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman is full of toe-tapping, tongue-in-cheek gems. Shaiman, known mostly for film scores, including the uproariously raunchy one for the "South Park" movie, has a marvelous gift for pop melodies and catchy choruses, as well as a seemingly encyclopedic knowledge of Motown song styles. The score sounds --- gloriously --- like something Holland-Dozier-Holland might have whipped up if Broadway had been musically integrated back in the early '60s. (For the rocking and rolling finale, "You Can't Stop the Beat," Shaiman pays tribute to Phil Spector with equal affection.)" (Variety)
"Mr. Shaiman, the show's composer and its co-lyricist with Mr. Wittman, isn't sending up the music of the age of "American Bandstand." Nor is he simply replicating it. What he's doing instead is taking the infectious hooks and rhythms from period pop and R & B and translating them into the big, bouncy sound that Broadway demands...And while the savvy arrangements by Mr. Shaiman, with orchestrations by Harold Wheeler, nod happily to Motown, Elvis, Lesley Gore ballads and standards like "Higher and Higher," the score's appeal isn't nostalgic. It's music that builds its own self-contained, improbably symmetrical world..." (New York Times)
The above quote is from the "New York Times", Ben Brantley review, August 16, 2002, Section E, Part 1, Column 1 --it is the same reference as "footnote 11" (as I type this). The edits made today under "Critics" are correctly atributed. JeanColumbia (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by JeanColumbia (talk • contribs) 19:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vocal ranges

[edit]

At WP:MUSICALS, a recent consensus was not to add voice parts to musicals. The voice part designations are unreliable and can change from production to production. Also the internet sources for voice part designations are not reliable. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corrections needed

[edit]

I attempted to correct glaring errors in the character descriptions but my edits were reverted. Perhaps this was due to some format problem or uncredited sources (maybe it was just more info that wanted) but here I will cite text for you and you can do with it as you please. If it were up to me this would not be a B-class article with some of this misinformation. In the Broadway show Edna runs a laundry business out of her home, her first scene involves giving Prudy her laundry (pretty pricey for a few pairs of petty pants). Later she says she had a dream too once she "dreamt of making her own line of queen size clothing" this is said before Timeless to Me. Tracy also never says I want to be on the Corny Collins show, the line is "but mama, I wanna be famous!" before Mama Im a Big Girl Now. In addition to suggest that Link only loves Tracy for her inner beauty is to ignore the point of the show that beauty comes in all shapes and sizes and to ignore his 2 lines "you look beautiful...(behind bars; when youre unconcious)." Amber has less than stellar abilities established by her mom (Amber your dancing was atrocious today), Tracy (I guess Ambers pretty but she cant dance) and Penny (plastic little spastic). While obnoxious certainly describes Velma, scheming is more to the point because 1)she says "Amber Im willing to lie cheat and steal to win you that crown" and she also "****ed the judges" to win her own crown back in her hayday and 2)her meddling is what causes Tracy to go into solitary confinement ("It pays to have a politician in your pocket" & "Mrs Von Tussle, manipulating our judicial system just to win a contest is unamerican"). Maybe Wilbur is a secondary character but he expressly says he dreamt of "opening a chain of joke shops world wide" and I can't imagine why it wouldn't be important that he's the one who tells her "tracy, this tv thing you really want it? (its my dream daddy) then you go for it!". The "Step On Up" song I attempted to add to the additional songs section is a highly discussed song and worth including, I can cite online sources if this is better than saying its in the coffee table book, I interviewed the original Motormouth for a website once and it was a topic of discussion. I also tried to add "Velma's Revenge" as a song but its not on the cast album so maybe that needs to be under "additional songs" but it is a song in the show "shes a blemish, a blackhead that must be expelled, theres a standard of beauty that must be upheld". Another mistake I've found is that you credit I Know Where I've Been to Motormouth and Nadine. There is no Nadine in the Broadway show, the dynamite track that backs up Motormouth on that song is named Pearl, Nadine is the name used in the MOVIE, this is not true for the show. I can find a source that explains that the dynamite tracks on Bway are Pearl, Peaches and Cindy Watkins if its necessary. 24.193.154.242 (talk) 06:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Dear Christina, Thanks for the comments and corrections. Your comments very are helpful, but we need to get them into the right places in the article. I made a few changes based on what you wrote above. The descriptions of the characters should be as brief as possible. Elaboration should be in the plot summary rather than in the character descriptions; so I tried to put some of the info you mentioned into the plot summary. I think that plot details like Edna handing pants to someone are not important enough to mention, but the fact that she runs the business out of her home *is* important enough to mention. So, feel free to go through the plot summary and correct anything that is clearly wrong, based on the show's script. As for the song list, if a song is actually sung in the B'way production, it should be listed, and you need to give your source for any new information there, with title, author, date, publisher and page number. If a song is not actually performed in the show but is notable, we can discuss it in a "Note" under the song list. If you give us the information here on the talk page, we can help you get it formatted and into the article. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you were able to incorporate the information that you did. Im still sort of new to Wikipedia and I feel like Im always doing something wrong. Here's some info on songs and other stuff. "Velma's Revenge" appeared in your synopsis, but not under the musical numbers heading... it is a musical number, in the show even now but its not on the cast recording. The controversy around "I Know Where I've Been" and the lyrics to the other song they wrote "Step On Up" appear on pages 142 and 143 of Hairspray, The Roots. The Roots is the closest source you can possibly have to the show, its by Mark O'Donnell (Author), Thomas Meehan (Author), Marc Shaiman (Author), Scott Wittman (Author) -practically the entire creative team. Its a Faber & Faber; First Edition edition (April 30, 2003). You can check it out on Amazon, they let you see inside a page or two. On page 62 of the same book they describe a song called "It Doesn't Get Better Than This" which was written for Wilbur before they tried "Positivity" but both were ultimately cut. You refer to Velma's Cha Cha, the book on page 109 has the lyrics to a "Mother-Daughter Cha Cha" that was sung on Mother-Daughter Day at the end of act 1. In the place where you describe Velma's Cha Cha, there is a cut song, but the song there seemed to be titled "No One On This TV Show" (lyrics on pg 59) and fits the description you supply for Velma's Cha Cha, she sings making fun of Tracy but it was cut because they didnt want the audience listening to someone being so mean to the hero- I think perhaps the two songs were confused in the write up here or maybe its an entirely different song that was also tried. And early on when the show still involved a miss auto show crown instead of miss hairspray, in the place where "It's Hairspray" is sung now there was a song called "Take a Spin" sung by Corny, this is on page 149 where it basically says that they dropped the auto show idea because cars on stage are expensive. If you visit the official site for Hairspray In London, you see theyve actually noted the names of the dynamite tracks (Cindy, Peaches and Pearl) in their cast list. http://www.hairspraythemusical.co.uk/cast.html Reading it again, the "stern but kind" description of Edna sounds off. Edna in the musical hasn't been out of her house since "Mamie Eisenhower rolled her hose and bobbed her bangs" until Tracy gets her out for Welcome To The Sixties but even after her transformation she isnt confident because Big Blonde and Beautiful is also sung to Edna to get her to see herself as beautiful when she refuses to appear on TV at her current weight, and again with Timeless To Me, Wilbur is trying to cheer her up when she feels like her window of opportunity to fulfill her own dreams has passed. Shes shy, insecure about her weight and not making the most of her life. She tells Tracy not to audition because she fears Tracy will be made fun of not because shes stern. Of course she's angry with Tracy for getting detention but thats not a staying theme like her poor self image is. Thats all for now, Im going to take a look at the Wicked listing (which I hear is fabulous) and try to figure out some equivalent information for Hairspray. I promise to give you some time off before I come being a bother again. :) 24.193.154.242 (talk) 05:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Thanks, Christina. A few questions: Who sings "Velma's Revenge", just Velma, or anyone with her? What was the controversy around "I Know Where I've Been"? I added the book Hairspray: The Roots as a reference in the article, so now it is easy to cite in the footnotes by page number. I also made some new changes based on what you wrote above. Take a look at the "Background" section and see if you can find any more really important information about the background, genesis and production of the show from the book or elsewhere that is missing in the article now. Yes, Wicked is a pretty good article, as is Hair. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Velma sings "Velma's Revenge" on her own, shes really the only person on stage for that scene, on Broadway two boys are on stage facing the wall while she sings simply to be there to pull the set piece back when the scene ends. The Madison and The Nicest Kids Reprise dont appear on the soundtrack either, since I notice you included a symbol to indicate that, you may want to add that to those songs as well.

OK, I've added this to the article in the "Additional songs" section under the musical numbers. Take a look and see if I got it right. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect! 24.193.154.242 (talk) 08:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Also noteworthy about the cast album is that it was recorded before they came to New York so there are lyrics on the cast album that are different in the show now.

I'm not sure this needs to go in. Most cast albums have some changes from the show. If a whole song or verse is rewritten, it would be worth noting, and you can give the info under the musical numbers list.
I'll write up the differences, Miss Baltimore Crabs is significantly different I would say. My point is these days its far more common place for a cast album to be made after its been a success in NY, its early recording in itself is a noteworthy bit of information, I think anways. It should probably be paired with the fact that they raised their initial investment in one day (ill find a reference page, Im sure its in the Roots). Ordinary changes in cast recordings come from a show going through previews in NY, or changes over time to keep a show fresh, doing a cast recording before you know if your show will last is odd. 24.193.154.242 (talk) 08:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

There are errors in the background but I would need to look things up if you need a reference, Im used to being my own reference. Ive seen it over a hundred times, Ive worked for several cast members, Ive even seen it on tour in Los Angeles and the casino version in Atlantic City and these days Im running a Hairspray message board with the help of people at Margo Lion's office (you saw my fun facts topic on the musical theatre talk page).

Yes, we need references. See WP:V for an explanation. But fortunately, your knowledge of the show will help you locate the references. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know I know, I've read it, I wasn't trying to get out of citing sources, but some info I just KNOW and then I have to think to remember where I know it from... In the interest of saving time, I will probably first squeeze as much info out of The Roots before moving on to look for other sources, but the book has a lot of good stuff in it so that could last a while. I keep getting overwhelmed looking at this page and my mind says fix the stuff thats wrong, no wait thats missing, no fix whats wrong first... ha. 24.193.154.242 (talk) 08:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

I'll come back to other changes next time I check in because I've got a wealth of proof for I Know Where I've Been's controversial status as follows... (it might be overkill but here it is) According to The Roots page 142, on I Know Where Ive Been: "This was one of the first songs Scott and I (Marc is speaking) wrote, inspired by a scene late in the movie that takes place on the black side of town. It never dawned on us that a torrent of protest would follow us from almost everyone involved with the show. Its too sad... Its too preachy.. It doesnt belong... Tracy should sing the eleven o'clock number. We simply didnt want our show to be yet another show-biz version of a civil rights story where the black characters are just the background. And what could be more Tracy Turnblad-like than to give the eleven o'clock number to the black family at the heart of the struggle? Luckily although the intelligentsia remained aloof, the audiences embraced this moment, which enriches the happy ending to follow and it is our proudest achievement of the entire experience of writing Hairspray"

Great! I added this in the Background section. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I interviewed Mary Bond Davis, the Broadway Cast original Motormouth (I actually run her website now) and she said for spouzic.com (a now closed website that I used to write on, but the interview is still there if you want to find it): "When we started rehearsing April 15th 2002, for the Broadway run and Seattle and everything, "Step On Up" was still in the show, and I never heard "I Know Where I’ve Been" until about 2 to 3 weeks into rehearsal... I called up Marc and I said, "Marc, I gotta hear this other song. I have to hear this other song because the song that’s in its place is not speaking to me, nor is it serving the show, and it’s just not working in the spot where it is." And also, I thought the song was just inadequate, compared to all the other songs in the show. So when I said that to Marc, Marc said, "I’ve been meaning to call you… You’ve been on my mind and I’ve been meaning to call you, I want you to hear this other song. As soon as you hear it, you’re going to want to sing it". And I said, "Well, I wanna hear it." He said, "You know, I’ve had the sh*t sung out of it." And I said, "Yeah, but you haven’t heard me sing it... maybe the song shouldn’t have the shit sung out of it. Maybe the song just needs to be sung, and the story told, and that’s it." So Marc and I got together and he played the song for me, and the first thing out of my mouth was, "It’s an anthem." He played the song, and then he went into "Hairspray", the song that follows in the show. And I said, "Sideswipe… it’s gonna sideswipe everybody…", to have that song come in at that spot and then bring the Hairspray curtain in to go into "Hairspray", people aren’t going to know what hit them... So yeah, there was a lot of controversy, the producers didn’t want some big black chick coming on and wailin’, and then leaving the stage. And it’s like, you know what, I don’t have to do it like that. And it doesn’t have to be done like that, and it doesn’t have to be a typical 11 o’clock song, it can be, let’s tell the story. Make the song a part of the story...but at the first performance in Seattle, they were waiting to see how the audience would respond to that song, and the producers were going to decide that night whether that song was going to stay in the show or not. And the rest is history; it’s still in the show, thank goodness. And it’s healing a lot of people, it heals me on a nightly basis. And to think, Scott and Marc said they wrote it sipping martinis in Laguna Beach beside a pool."

Hmmm. This quote is less interesting for an encyclopedia article than the Shaiman song, because his quote tells the story from a more general point of view, and her quote is more about how she felt about it and how she approached the song. Also, the two of them together is too much information about just one aspect of the show. If I included anything from this quote, I would cut it down. If you get the cite to the exact webpage, I'll take another look, if you like. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didnt necessarily think the whole quote(s) were interesting for inclusion, I supplied them as proof of the song being controversial, this second quote supplies information not in the first one- that Step On Up was still in the show going into rehearsals, the woman playing Motormouth didnt even hear I Know Where I've Been till 2-3 weeks into rehearsals, that the first performance in Seattle was going to determine the fate of I Know Where I've Been... You would have to go to spouzic.com, click on interviews and click on Mary Bond Davis's name to get to the interview to see the whole thing (its long!) unfortunately the page has a redirect mechanism on it so if I gave you the direct link, it would just go back to the homepage of the site anyway (people do this to prevent hotlinking). I interviewed other Hairspray peeps for the site too- Matthew Morrison, Jenn Gambatese, Chester Gregory, even Marc Shaiman himself, but since its 4am, Im not entirely sure if any of them say anything worthy of an encyclopedia entry... Jenn may have made reference to the names of the wigs in the finale and the term 'wiglash' which they coined for the neck pains they got wearing the heavy structures. 24.193.154.242 (talk) 08:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Whats funnier still about this song to me, is that after Mary Bond Davis left, they brought in Darlene Love who DID sing the hell out of it and go for high notes and riffs, that they actually restaged the song on Broadway to make it fit her performance better. Darlene just left the show and I will be seeing the new Motormouth for the first time tomorrow, I am sure they have kept the staging changes made for Darlene but I'm curious to see if Jennifer Lewis sings it more like Mary or more like Darlene. 24.193.154.242 (talk) 07:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Thanks for all the info. I suggest that you register for an account, so you can have your own talk page, and people can post information to your talk page about editing on Wikipedia. Once you know a little more about how Wikipedia works, it will be more fun for you to edit. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will do that, next week sometime I guess. I just haven't gotten around to it. Thanks for helping me out. The show rocked tonight! 24.193.154.242 (talk) 08:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Its me, back with a screenname! :) I have a problem that confuses me a bit, Im not entirely sure how to fix it exactly. You have information here that is cited, but the information is still wrong, meaning something was lost in transcription, most of this applies to the Background information attributed to the Extras from the new movie. For example, Margo Lion does speak of watching Hairspray on the new movie's extras feature but she doesnt say it was on tv- she was home sick and rented some movies, Hairspray was one of them. She says she'd seen it before but this particular viewing convinced her it needed to be musicalized. Must I reference a new source to correct it? Most of this same info can be found in The Roots as well, but what I mean is, the correct story *is* in the video extras, it just wasn't properly written up. Much of the background is like this, with half correct information. John Waters insisted the mother remain played by a man, it wasn't Shaiman's idea to keep it, but he did suggest getting Harvey Fierstein for the role. Lion didn't outright agree to hire Marc and Scott, she was worried the two would make a bad team because theyre a couple and they wrote the three songs to prove they could work together- and all three of those songs are still in the show. Besprayed (talk) 04:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Yes, we have to find a source with the correct info to cite to. Lots of time, a source has some erroneous info, and we just need to add another source that corrects the error. I'm going to leave a nifty note on your talk page. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is what Im trying to say... the source (The DVD Extras) IS correct, but what is written here is not. The source isn't erroneous, its just been misquoted a bit. Anyway, I think the movie shouldn't be a source for this article at all. Using the movie as reference is probably what has caused many of the errors I've already edited- not everything true for the movie is true for the show in terms of plot and character. Im off to check out your note. :) Besprayed (talk) 08:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

Ah, OK! If the article simply misquotes the DVD release, you can just correct the transcription. The article should certainly reflect correct info in the source correctly. It would be helpful to say in what part of the DVD Extra the information appears (e.g., in the feature interviewing so-and-so), or in some way try to help someone zero in on where the info comes from, so everyone could easily verify it. Good luck - I'm off to work! -- Ssilvers (talk) 12:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awards section

[edit]

I would suggest dropping the Theatregoers awards and instead putting in the Laurence Olivier Awards, which are, I think, more notable. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good idea to me. I had a separate thought on the awards section. There is a bit of inconsistency in terms of some awards specifying the name of the nominee and others do not. I don't imagine this is due to insufficient sources as the Tony & Drama Desk websites both indicate past winners and nominees, so perhaps they're just incomplete entries? I think it's best to include the nominee/winner name across the board. Agree? Besprayed (talk) 14:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]
1) Yes, certainly the Olivier Awards should be included. I'd also drop the Theatregoers awards; but I'm open to putting them back if someone will explain what they are and show that they are --"notable".
The theatregoer awards are self proclaimed as the only major theatre awards that allow average folk to decide the winner. Their website says 1,000 people nominate their favorites and then they open the voting for two months to all users on their website and magazine subscribers. It is presented by WhatsOnStage.com, which is a reputable site like BroadwayWorld but unlike the fan choice awards that local NY sites run, theirs does come complete with a ceremony, party and all the bells and whistles. That is all I know about them, don't know if that helps. Besprayed (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]
In my opinion, we list too many awards, and it just makes the articles look silly. I would personally drop everything except Tonys and Oliviers, or if the production was not on the West End or B'way, then only the highest level of local award. But even if we are going to put in Drama Desk, I would still leave out the proliferation of these "people's choice" awards. Just my 2cents. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2) Sometimes the name of the nominee is shown. Sometimes not. I've looked at, and edited, many musical theatre articles, and find no set pattern. I say, do what gives the most important information with the least amount of words. I will say that if the director or choreographer is nominated, and he/she is the only director/choreographer, AND their name is shown in the "Production" section, no need to show the name again. Lately, I like to make sure the creatives (e.g. set/light/sound/costume) get their name listed, as they are generally not listed elsewhere. Also, if the name is shown once, say in the Tony award section, I generally don't see the need to show it again in another Award section, say the Drama Desk. And, of course, where there is a nomination for one award but there are several performers/creatives in that category, it is essential that the specific name be listed. There, my thoughts (as requested), but... over the course of the time I've been editing I've changed, partally because of time constraints, partially becase I'm following what went before, so I myself have not been consistent.
I'll start by deleting the Theatregoers award and adding the Olivier. Next...JeanColumbia (talk)
I'm pretty sure the book writer's name isn't anywhere in this article as of yet and many creatives are missing from the article as well. I understand the concept you've suggested for names in awards but it just seems like it would be harder to read and reference if say someone wants to check a Drama Desk Award but they have to go elsewhere on the page to find the name of that winner, especially if that means scrolling all the way back up to the background or production section to find it, but maybe it will suffice when it is properly implemented. Besprayed (talk) 17:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

I don't mind listing the designers names (especially set and costumes but also, I guess lighting) in the production sections. I also don't mind repeating names in the awards section; I would just list fewer awards. I don't see any reason to ever name the "sound" designer. How can the sound designer be more important than the music director? We don't list music directors, ergo, we should not list sound designers. Next we'll list the guy running the light board. (Ain't I gumpy?) -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the first sentence of this article: "Hairspray is a musical with music by Marc Shaiman, lyrics by Scott Wittman and Shaiman and a book by Mark O'Donnell and Thomas Meehan, based on the 1988 John Waters movie Hairspray." The book writer, etc, are listed. This sentence is in the section on "Background": "Meanwhile, Marshall had started work on Chicago, and Jack O'Brien and Jerry Mitchell were hired by Lion to direct and choreograph, respectively." (emphasis mine) If you don't think this is clear enough, by all means revise. The other creatives are rarely mentioned, by the way, per Musical theatre structure guidelines. If you would like to show the awards in another way, by all means do it. You are as entitled to edit as anyone. If someone doesn't like it, they will let you know. JeanColumbia (talk) 17:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Christina, we always list the author, lyricist and composer the way that the first sentence of the article is written. These are the people who do not change from production to production. Then, when we talk about each production, we name the director and choreographer, and if the designers are notable (that is, if they have Wiki articles), then I list them too. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Im so sorry, I must have just glazed over all that! I really didn't see it and now I feel dumb. Sigh, I blame my sleep deprivation... but I really don't see Paul Huntley anywhere and he did the wigs, and for a show about hairspray, I would expect a whole section on the wigs. He doesn't have a wikipedia page that I know of yet hes done the wigs for hundreds of Broadway shows, and Hairspray was especially notable for him because stylistically hes known for wigs that blend in, not make a statement and there have been plenty of interviews with him on the wigs he made for this show. Besprayed (talk) 04:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

It makes sense to list Huntley in this instance, then. I'll put him in. If the interviews contain something particularly noteworthy, it would be appropriate to included a short quote or some other relevant info. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Im still in search of info for this page. I found a link with info on the broadway set designer, costume designer, and most importantly the wig man, paul huntley. This page could probably be used to start a Paul Huntley page too, are the musical theatre group people doing pages like this as well for broadway individuals? The interview has interesting info on the wigs in the show, the source material he consulted, that he made 70 for the show, how long they took to build, how Edna wears five wigs throughout the show to make her transformation, how he had to relearn teasing and how Velma isn't supposed to be a natural blonde. It also indicates here (as well as in the Roots) that the original creative team were given a tour of Baltimore by John Waters so they could authentically recreate the place. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/bal-as.intro26may26,0,3756508.story?page=3 Besprayed (talk) 00:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC) christina[reply]

If you are interested in starting an article for Paul Huntley, go for it. I doubt that anyone else will start it any time soon. There are not a lot of good articles on designers. For a reasonable example of how a designer page might look, see C. Wilhelm or Percy Anderson. The number of wigs in the show is newsworthy with respect to this production, but it is not notable in the encyclopedic sense. The basic guideline here is that Wikipedia is not a newspaper. See: WP:NOT. I think the most that one could say about the wigs is that the period wigs are very important to the look of the show. To decide whether something like this is notable or not, think about Cats, for example. What is still important about Cats? to an encyclopedia reader? Clearly the costumes were very important, as was the choreography, but they will change slightly from production to production. In 20 years, yes, the wigs will still be very important to the history and revivals of Hairpray, but the number of wigs worn by a character in the original production will be trivial. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But isnt this why we include a production specific section with info on each? I stated above, I would have expected an entire section on the wigs, but maybe thats silly of me. Perhaps that Edna uses five wigs isn't all that interesting but that all 70 wigs were handmade strand by strand, each requiring four days of work from two people who used a magazine called Mr. Ray & His Magic Brush, given to them by John Waters for inspiration seemed pretty noteworthy to me. I didn't think that sounded like trivia, but you'd know better than I would if its appropriate. I know but havent found in writing yet that they had to play with various materials for the wigs as well because the wigs were quite heavy leading to the actresses coining the term wiglash. I was also looking into finding what they use in the Hairspray cans because I remember reading that they played with a few options before finding something that wouldn't be sticky slippery or make the actors cough. Would that be good info to include? Rock On, christina Besprayed (talk) 04:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you could ask for a second opinion at the musicals talk page. Happy editing.  :) -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe. I'm just trying to figure out what you think is notable because earlier you said a quote wouldn't be a bad thing to include if there was anything appropriate. There is one wig that is virtually identical in all productions, and thats the main characters because its essentially the logo, should I look for something on that? We can come back to this point, there are several other things that need attention on the page. Rock on, christina Besprayed (talk) 02:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cast lists

[edit]

Notable cast members for each production should be mentioned in the productions section in the description of the relevant production. This has been the consensus at WP:MUSICALS for articles on musicals across the project. Best regards. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 International Thespian Cast of Hairspray

[edit]

I have posted information about this production 3 times now and the article has been deleted per the argument that it is an amateur production. This show is in fact a National Cast and is being constructed in close conjunction with Musical Theatre International and is in fact the show that will be the first production of Hairspray to be produced by all non-equity actors. The cast is working closely with Marc Shaiman and Scott Whittman and the cast will be producing a Cast Recording CD of the show to be sold and distributed publicly. The production is also highly publicized (The Dish Network will be doing a 1 hour documentary on the cast and the production of the show on the Stage Channel in 10 different states this summer). I ask that this information please be left up because this is the first production that will move along the royalties release for Hairspray and is a major stepping stone for the shows history and performance journey. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BroadwayFuture46 (talk • contribs) 05:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is a "national cast?" All musicals have a "first" amateur production at some point, but they are not notable. I am performing in an International Cast this summer at at festival, and my show will be performed in a 1,000 seat opera house before an audience drawn from all over the world. But it will be an amateur production and will NOT be notable. Why is this production notable? See: WP:MUS. Why don't you wait until the production actually happens and is reviewed, so that there will be lots of verifiable information to reference about it, so that you can explain in the encyclopedia what it's relative importance is, compared to the Broadway and West End productions. Also, why do mention the names of the performers? Are they famous? Why do you use capital letters for so many words in what you are writing? Look at the rest of the article. Can you see that you are not writing encyclopedically? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot synopsis

[edit]

An anonymous editor has rewritten the plot synopsis, without an edit summary, in a manner that does not appear to comply with Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure and uses unencyclopedic language. The plot synopsis for this show was carefully edited recently by editors familiar with this show. If you believe that you can improve the plot synopsis, please explain the reasons for your edits. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, it is a copyright violation of http://www.nodanw.com/shows_h/hairspray.htm. — MusicMaker5376 18:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Australia cast

[edit]

According to her Twitter post, Lucy Durack says: "To dispell rumours-I am not playing Amber in Hairspray because I play Glinda in Wicked! However,I very much look forward 2 SEEING Hairspray! 6:31 PM Jun 9th via web". I am aware that this is not a WP:RS; I am also aware that various IPs have been adding her, as well as others, to various Hairspray productions. I firmly believe that all casting should be properly sourced per WP:VERIFY and WP:PROVEIT, and so have -- and will continue to do so -- either delete or ask for proper references for all casting.JeanColumbia (talk) 11:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy

[edit]

In the final scene The job at ultra glow is given to Velma. Well, I could be wrong but the current script has it that way. Because the joke is ultra glow is for women with colour and is given to the rascist Velma — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.207.80 (talk) 11:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to production/cast

[edit]

I have reverted today's edits by BroadwayExpert as they are unsourced. BroadwayExpert added a Broadway production in 2011, with Jonathon Groff. I did a google search on Groff or the Apollo venue but found nothing. I also checked Internet Broadway database with no 2011 production showing. This needs a WP:RS. Flami72 (talk) 13:59, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hairspray (musical). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hairspray (musical). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:48, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Hairspray (musical). 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) 13:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

compare and contrast

[edit]

Articles about adaptations, remakes, etc., often seem to have sections dealing with changes made from the original. The reasons why, when given, can be quite interesting. I would enjoy seeing a rundown of the changes made from the 1988 film. Thanks!! PurpleChez (talk) 17:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hairspray (musical). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 01:56, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on Hairspray (musical). 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 01:08, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hairspray_(musical)&oldid=1210109887"