Talk:Trafalgar Theatre

Legitimate theatre and references

SFTVLGUY2 takes me to task (on my Talk page) for removing the word 'legitimate', and for adding a 'needs references' template.

I am restoring both of these changes, for the following reasons:

'legitimate theatre'

I accept that the phrase 'legitimate theatre' exists and appears in dictionaries (I admit I did not know this until you pointed it out to me). However I continue to feel that it is inappropriate in the introductory line of an article, for two reasons:

• it is a phrase that is only ever used in a contrastive sense, as was previously in the sentence further down describing its return to theatrical use: I accept that it was appropriate there, though I still feel it was not necessary and so have not restored it. But using the word in the introduction implies that there is something significant about its status as legitimate - for example, that most other theatres are not. Why else use it?
• in any case, almost all the references I've found are to 'legitimate theatre' in the sense of a body of work, and not to a legitimate theatre as a building. (There are some counter examples in Wikipedia itself).

In short, I found the word confusing (I didn't know what it was trying to say, isolated in the introductory sentence) and unnecessary (the point was explained further below).

I find no logical reason why a Wikipedia article about a theatre should not include an adjective defining its use - a "legitimate" theatre, a "movie" theatre, a "vaudeville" theatre", etc. It's no different than identifying an individual by his citizenship, a film or play by its genre, etc. That one editor finds the word "confusing" because he didn't understand what it meant doesn't make its use wrong. (Perhaps I should write an article explaining "legitimate theatre" so there will be a blue link to assist those who are confused?) This seems to be a serious case of nit-picking. I certainly think there are far more serious Wikipedia issues that need addressing, but in order to prove my point that this is a commonly used, acceptable term, I refer to the title of the book at [http://www.amazon.com/At-This-Theatre-Informal-Legitimate/dp/0396084680], the second paragraph at [1], the eighth paragraph at [2], and the listing for the New Amsterdam Theatre at[3], all of which use the term to refer to a building rather than a "body of work." SFTVLGUY2 14:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't and don't think it was nit-picking. I rather suspect it is a US/UK thing: there is effectively no other kind of theatre in the UK (we don't generally talk of 'movie theatres' and exclusively vaudeville or variety theatres are almost non-existent today). Therefore the phrase 'legitimate theatre', though it exists in the dictionary, is not in common use. It read to me not as an adjective defining its use but as a value judgment, which is why I queried it. From your examples it clearly is in use in the US.

I'm not going to change it back again, but I believe that many British readers who encounter this article will find it equally odd. --ColinFine 23:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm afraid to but in - and you'll probably tell me to butt out - but, I'm changing this to West End Theatre, to be consistent with all the receiving houses in the West End, and appending a West End Theatre navigation box. I hope this meets with your approval. Kbthompson 17:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It certainly gets my approval. --ColinFine 22:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I would agree that the prior term is not really understood in the UK - beyond (bizarrely the 18th and 19th centuries, when the distinction did apply). I find it difficult to accept that a theatre that stood, with its trousers firmly around its ankles for 20 years a legitimate theatre. West End explains what it is exactly. Kbthompson 22:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Reference

SFTVLGUY2 correctly points out that the page has a link to the Trafalgar Studios official website. However, the only statements in the Wikipedia article for which I can find support on that website are the address, the years of opening of the studios, and what the show was that opened studio 1. (If I bothered to count the seats in the seating plans that might support two other items of information in the article). As far as I am concerned, that is an article which lacks references.

The template I used is not completely appropriate because there is one source; but it verifies hardly any of the article, and there doesn't seem to be a more appropriate template.

I'm sorry if you found my editing comment rude: it was not intended to be - I really did think 'legitimate' a bizarre word in the introductory sentence. --ColinFine 22:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

The addition of a second external link should satisfy anyone who believes this articles required additional references. SFTVLGUY2 14:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you: that's exactly what was needed to verify the content of the article. --ColinFine 23:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Confusing x 2

The 1981 photo shows the theatre in operation at a time in which, according to the text, it was "shuttered".

Also, the auditorium was apparently given protected listed building status in 1996 - but how does that square with it having been redone to have two of them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pawebster (talk • contribs) 22:38, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 30 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Trafalgar Theatre overwriting the redirect, per Oknazevad's clarification. No such user (talk) 11:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

---

Trafalgar Studios → Trafalgar Theatre – Launch of Trafalgar Theatre .

References

Freyahdk (talk) 15:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs (talk) 00:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose – the suggestion is malformed, since the target is taken and redirects to a different topic. And the stated rationale is uninterpretable. Dicklyon (talk) 05:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
• Support. The venue is being renamed as part of a major renovation. That the Duke of York's used to be called the Trafalgar Theatre a long time ago can be handled by a hatnote. No need to keep an outdated title because the name is recycled from another theatre's outdated name. oknazevad (talk) 22:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.