Talk:Wish You Were Here (Once Upon a Time)

Sleeping "Beauty" and "Daddy"

There seems to be some dispute over whom the Evil Queen is describing in this statement. An ISP user strongly believes that she is referring only to David, and has instructed me not to edit this page to say otherwise. I don't dispute the quote from the transcript, "Say hi to Sleeping Beauty. Or is it Sleeping Daddy?", which the ISP user claims as proof against my change. But I believe that the EQ is referring to both Mary Margaret and David, by indicating that one of them must be asleep ("Sleeping--") and she doesn't personally know which of them is asleep at the moment, Mary Margaret ("Beauty") or David ("Daddy"). (Or she might know, but simply wishes to emphasize that she has harmed both of Emma's parents.) The ISP user reverted my change to this article, which described the moment according to my interpretation. Can we get a consensus as to how this exchange, a "Cultural Reference," should be described? Here are the two versions: --DavidK93 (talk) 17:00, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

• 96.19.112.107: The Evil Queen references Sleeping Beauty by referring to David as "Sleeping Beauty." She remarks, "Say hi to Sleeping Beauty. Or is it Sleeping Daddy?"
• DavidK93: The Evil Queen references Sleeping Beauty by referring to Snow and David as "Sleeping Beauty" and "Sleeping Daddy."

The difference is that I am citing the exact quote, while you are applying your interpretation. Kindly check this screenshot of the transcript of the episode and leave the edit as is, thanks very much. The actual quote is certainly more valid than the interpretation of that quote. She specifically says "or is it Sleeping Daddy?" She's talking to Emma and David. http://i63.tinypic.com/2gxqzgm.png

Given that David is present, and, I believe, unconscious for this exchange, it is obvious that both are in reference to David. Otherwise, she would have said *and* Sleeping Daddy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.19.112.107 (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

You are mistaken; David is not present. The only people present are Regina, the Evil Queen, Emma, and Hook. See 1:04 at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DU8ZHawi6A. To be clear, we are both interpreting; if neither of us were interpreting, the only valid content would be "The Evil Queen references Sleeping Beauty by saying "Sleeping Beauty" and "Sleeping Daddy."" The EQ does not state to whom she is referring, so that information can't be obtained without interpreting what is said. I had already confirmed that I agree that the EQ's line is "Say hi to Sleeping Beauty. Or is it Sleeping Daddy?" So you don't need to reproduce it in any further ways to show it to me. As for why she doesn't say "and Sleeping Daddy," to reiterate, only one of them is asleep at any given time, so she's emphasizing that one or the other must always be asleep. --DavidK93 (talk) 21:44, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Seeing no further comment, and having refuted the specific claims made by the IP user, I will rewrite the sentence. --DavidK93 (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I hadn't edited because nothing was confirmed and no one else placed their input. This implied that my original edit was fine by general consensus. I understand your point, but the quote could also be read as sarcasm and a jive against Charming, like the constant shepherd insults. Let's just leave it alone for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.19.112.107 (talk) 12:45, 23 January 2017

The lack of other input is not a general consensus that your edit was fine. I refrained from editing because it's appropriate to seek consensus first; but your edit stood until I changed it, and mine stood until you changed it; nobody else has provided input and there is no consensus for either option. How about wording that doesn't explicitly state to whom each part of her comment refers, since that is what we don't agree on. Here is another option:

• The Evil Queen references Sleeping Beauty by referring to the victims of her curse as "Sleeping Beauty" or "Sleeping Daddy."

Would that be acceptable to you? Also, for formatting purposes, please note that it's considered good practice to sign your Talk page posts by typing four tildes: ~~~~. And Talk page posts should be indented with colons (:) rather than bullets (*). Bullets are used for explicit votes on polls, or for lists within posts (such as the bulleted options for the edit we've been discussing). And in order to facilitate establishing an individual presence and a good reputation on Wikipedia, you might benefit from creating an account instead of continuing to edit as an IP user. --DavidK93 (talk) 15:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

I made the edit I suggested a week ago. --DavidK93 (talk) 19:13, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Since 96.19.112.107 and I clearly have been unable to reach any agreement on how this should be phrased, I am posting a request for a third opinion. --DavidK93 (talk) 18:11, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Response to Third Opinion Request:

Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Wish You Were Here (Once Upon a Time) and cannot recall any prior interaction with the editors involved in this discussion which might bias my response. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here.

Opinion: One particularly wise Third Opinion Wikipedian, RegentsPark, once succinctly put the purpose of Third Opinions like this, "It's sort of like if you're having an argument on the street in front of City Hall and turn to a passer-by to ask 'hey, is it true that the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale?'." It would appear that both of you are interpreting the transcript. The transcript is a PRIMARY source (even if prepared by a third party) and the primary source rule absolutely forbids interpretation of a primary source: "Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so." (Emphasis in original.) Wikipedia does not have many absolute "do not's" but this is one. The fact that you're disagreeing over this suggests that interpretation is indeed necessary, so reporting only exactly what happened is the only legitimate course.

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TransporterMan (TALK) 20:24, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, @TransporterMan. I believe further clarification may be needed, because the use of the word "interpret" has already become loaded in this conversation. The IP user has asserted that his or her original version doesn't contain interpretation, but that mine does. I agree with you, in that I believe that we both interpreted the dialogue in the scene (whether read from the transcript or viewed in the episode). However, I believe that the third option I offered later (and eventually put in the article) does not interpret the dialogue. (The Evil Queen references Sleeping Beauty by referring to the victims of her curse as "Sleeping Beauty" or "Sleeping Daddy.") Do you believe that it does, in fact, interpret the primary source? If so, could you offer a proposed text to describe this moment in a way that follows from the primary source without interpretation? This is my first time using the Third Opinion function; if it's inappropriate to ask for further in-depth discussion, just let me know and I apologize in advance. --DavidK93 (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I ended up locating a secondary source, the International Business Times, that quoted this line and identified it as referring to Emma's "parents," rather than a single parent. I reverted the article to my previous version of this cultural reference, and I replaced the primary source, the episode transcript, with this new secondary source that supports that version. --DavidK93 (talk) 15:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)