Talk:The Wild Duck

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Wild Duck 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

Norway

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway 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.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Theatre High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Plagiarism

A recent addition to the page by User:Andrewpetergoss said "Hjalmar Ekdal thanks you for plagiarizing this innacurate summary of The Wild Duck from http://worldebooklibrary.com/eBooks/Coradella_Collegiate_Bookshelf_Collection/ibsen-adollshouse.pdf." This has been reverted, but it does look as if much of the content (the whole of the paragraph "The Wild Duck is considered ... household income") has indeed been copied verbatim from that source - though I cannot comment on whether it is inaccurate. Someone who knows the play needs to rewrite it. Snalwibma 22:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sloppy Writing

This entry is ungrammatical, poorly written, and only marginally informative. It also comes across as a poor stub and doesn't have enough citations or material. It should be rewritten from top to bottom. 67.204.0.234 (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference ~ I will fix the reference when I learn how 114.73.21.182 (talk) 11:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hamlet

There is a lone comparison to Hamlet in the Analysis & Criticism section. As it is, it seems out-of-place and unfounded. Either it should be removed, or someone familiar with both plays should elaborate on it.

Thurn&Taxis (talk) 23:20, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is no citation for that remark (let along from a reputable source. And it is indeed wrong; Gregers' relation to the truth is very different from Hamlet's. So I'm going to remove it. Pechmerle (talk) 06:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Analysis and Criticism section almost entirely unsourced

This long section has only one citation. The section as a whole also seems a misfocused analysis of Ibsen's subtle play. Ibsen's play does not at all support the (supposed) absolute idealism of Gregers Werle. The great Ibsen translator and commentator Una Ellis-Fermor remarked (Penguin Classics 1950, intro., p. 12): "It takes two to tell the truth: one to speak and one to hear. It is obvious from the first that Hjalmar [Ekdal] is incapable of hearing it, and before the play is out we realize that Gregers [Werle] is in fact incapable of speaking it." I am inclined to delete this entire section, leaving space for someone who might replace it with literary criticism of the play that is both properly sourced and truer to Ibsen's dialectic interplay of destructive truth and "saving lie" (in Ellis-Fermor's translation of that key phrase). Pechmerle (talk) 06:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]