Talk:King John (play)

Theatre Mid‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elizabethan theatre (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elizabethan theatre, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Elizabethan theatreWikipedia:WikiProject Elizabethan theatreTemplate:WikiProject Elizabethan theatreElizabethan theatre articles

Shakespeare High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare 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.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Why does 'King John' link here, rather than to the actual King John?

Isn't this a slight oversight. Surely the subject is more important? 82.40.163.5 (talk) 14:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There have been many kings called John, the page that the real King John of Englandis found at (John of England) is a lot more enlightening. To be honest this play is the only notable thing that is unambiguously called "King John" rather than "King John of England" or "King John IV" or whatever. ~ Mazca (talk) 14:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Also, if you look at the List of English monarchs and List of British monarchs and click on the names of various monarchs to go to their articles, you'll find that articles have titles such as Richard I of England, Mary II of England, Anne of Great Britain, Victoria of the United Kingdom, etc. And if you look at a list of Shakespeare's plays, and click on the links to get to the articles, you'll see that we use Macbeth, not The Tragedy of Macbeth (which is simply a redirect to Macbeth), etc. We use Richard II (play), simply because Richard II is a disambiguation page. So the answer is that even if Shakespeare had never written his play about King John, the article about the person King John would still be called John of England, and our articles about Shakespeare's plays generally use the simple title of the play (without "the tragedy of", "the history of", etc.) except in cases where we're forced not to because a page with that name already exists. Cowardly Lion (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shakespeare's King John at Drury Lane Theatre.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Shakespeare's King John at Drury Lane Theatre.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 9, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-06-09. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 19:16, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Why isn't this at King John (play)? We don't have Richard II at The Life and Death of King Richard the Second. john k (talk) 20:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shakesbeer pub crawl (sic)

I've marked the reference for the New York Shakespeare Exchange as a dead link. A quick flypast of their web page, however, shows the current offering to be the Shakesbeer pub crawl.Taking this as an indication of the scope and significance of the group, I propose to delete its 2011 KJ production as WP:NN, subject to the views of regular (and registered) contributors. --217.155.32.221 (talk) 13:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've put in one with demonstrated notability (and no known affinity with "four-beer festival" pub crawls) instead. --217.155.32.221 (talk) 07:53, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Angiers => Angers

Changed the last Angiers to Angers in the article. As Angers is described as a corruption of Angiers, there's actually a strong case for changing all references back to Angiers,- as also the latter name corresponds to the one Shakespeare used in the play.--Lmstearn (talk) 10:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lmstearn: I agree. The form given in, say, the Folger edition (the first one I had to hand) is "Angiers". And since Angiers redirects to Angers, we can use the former with no confusion. Do go ahead and change it. --Xover (talk) 11:04, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The 1623 First Folio in the Bodleian Library (linked to in the First Folio article) spells it "Angiers" as well.Yorickexercitus (talk) 17:22, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

least well known history play?

@Xover: I have a source that calls this Shakespeare's least-known history play if you want to add it.^[1] I defer to your judgement here.

References

^ N.A. (20 January 2001). "Booking now". The Times. United Kingdom. 7EH1543948703. Retrieved 27 July 2019 – via EBSCOHost. New season opens with Gregory Doran directing Guy Henry in Shakespeare's least-known history play.

Cheers! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:05, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MJL: Thanks. I think this is a bit to incidental to source such an assertion to; especially since I'm pretty sure we can find more substantive sources for it if needed. PS. I changed your source link to one that links directly to EBSCO rather than a library proxy. --Xover (talk) 13:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] N.A. (20 January 2001). "Booking now". The Times. United Kingdom. 7EH1543948703. Retrieved 27 July 2019 – via EBSCOHost. New season opens with Gregory Doran directing Guy Henry in Shakespeare's least-known history play.

[1]