Talk:Never Forget (musical)

Information in musical theatre articles

Pursuant to Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Theatre/Article Structure, I have removed the list of ensemble members and most of the creative team. I did leave in the names of the principal designers (and moved all that info to the top of the article, which has all the production info), although most of our musicals articles do not include that information. QUESTION: Did the designers design the tour, or just the West End production? Did the producers produce the tour, or just the West End production?

The most useful thing you can do for this article now, I think, is to expand the plot summary. But please do not use the markety language from the website. Instead, look through the script (which you indicated that you have) and summarize the action of the show, divided by acts. For a good example, see Buddy - The Buddy Holly Story. Best regards, and Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message and for the new Synopsis information. I tried to make the language a little more formal and what we call "encyclopedic". Be careful of words like "world domination", unless you are quoting the script. See WP:PEACOCK. Please describe Act II more. What happens after she gets there? It should be a complete plot summary, not a teaser. Everyone knows that the plot summary will contain spoilers here. Also, is the audition that you refer to the audition for Ron, or the audition for the competition? Also, please divide the summary into Act I and Act II. It's getting there, thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Take That & Never Forget The Musical

The Music for this musical has been composed by Gary Barlow The Lyrics for the music are by Gary Barlow

The Musical is based on the music of Take That —Preceding unsigned comment added by Light Defender (talk • contribs) 10:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit dispute

could an admin check the source and added this diff in as the article is currently misleading. --87.112.25.245 (talk) 11:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Only if everyone editing this article reaches a consensus. So start talking. --  Netsnipe   ►  11:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

what's to talk about? on the one hand, we have a SPA who wants to promote a musical - part of that promotion is editing take that related articles to remove the irksome fact that the band is not actually connected with the musical. As the article currently stands, it does not represent a NPOV because it is misleading about the involvement of Gary Barlow (which could actually be a BLP matter I guess because the article currently represents a fact we know not to be true and more over we have verification not to be true). I am simply trying to insert a sourced statement (from the band, printed in the times - a source we consider highly reliable) that indicated the band is unconnected with the musical. This was already mentioned at the COI board and the fellow of an uninvolved editor was that Light defender's edits did not represent a NPOV. --87.114.151.105 (talk) 11:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The above contributor has changed IP address several times today in an attemp to bypass IP blocking. My defense of the article has now resulted in my own username being blocked - which I am contesting. The above contributor has chosen to remain anonymous in order to hide their own conflict of interest.

The old statement previously made by the band has been withdrawn for legal reasons. It is now totally irrelevant to this article.

Gary Barlow is both the composer and the lyricist of the musical.

The musical is entirely based on the music of Take That.

The Musical is completely and properly licensed by the above.

The musical is totally relevant to both the Take That and the Gary Barlow articles.

(Light Defender) - With the current block in place I am unable to answer to this dispute under my own username 81.151.254.220 (talk) 12:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The musical is entirely based on the music of Take That. - which nobody is disputing, so it's irrelevant.

The Musical is completely and properly licensed by the above. - which nobody is disputing, so it's irrelevant.

The musical is totally relevant to both the Take That and the Gary Barlow articles. - which nobody is disputing, so it's irrelevant.

The dispute is that you are systematically trying to remove source material that states that Take that are unconnected with the musical, so we come to the only point you make that is relevant.

The old statement previously made by the band has been withdrawn for legal reasons. It is now totally irrelevant to this article. - so please supply a source to that effect. --87.113.75.133 (talk) 12:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I edited the musical's article yesterday, but I was unaware of this controversy at the time. Sorry to wake up to a huge edit war! It is well-documented that Take That made the statement on its website that the editor quoted from The Times, and numerous news articles have noted (and continue to note) the controversy. It is clear that Take That distanced itself from the musical and has had no involvement in the development of the musical. Barlow also made other negative statements about the musical Never Forget. It would be appropriate to mention the controversy and to cite the article from The Times that the editor cited. However, the placement of the information in the musical's article was not optimal. I would be happy to take a crack at presenting the information in a more balanced way in the article. Best regards. -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree with Ssilvers and I think it would be appropriate to place the information in a better place and make it more neutral in tone.Broadweighbabe (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

How do we make a direct quote "more neutral"? since all the addition consists of is "it was reported in the times that" and then the quote. --87.113.91.149 (talk) 14:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the quote is neutral, but it can be placed better in the article. The way you tried to insert it, with a major heading near the top of the article is not optimal. I would propose to move the section lower down. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I am sure that there is a way to place it in the article so that it flows well. I also agree that the information belongs there. It was well reported in the media and is relevant to the article.--Broadwaygal (talk) 14:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I have no problem with that, however - the intro needs an edit as it implies that Barlow was involved in the musical: Never Forget is a musical based on the songs of Take That, with a book written by Daniel Brockelhurst, Guy Jones and Ed Curtis, with music and lyrics by Gary Barlow. We need to make it clear from the outset that he was not (oh and the same applies to the Barlow article itself, where efforts have been made to imply he is connected). --87.113.91.149 (talk) 15:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait, I was going to agree, but this is getting more complicated. Light Defender is now saying that Barlow has given script approval. Do you have info to the contrary? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

not in the slightest, but then of course wikipedia doesn't work like that. Does he have a source to support that claim? This isn't actually complex at all, we can only add what we can source because wikipedia works off verification not off "truth". I'll repeat what I've told him a number of times, he can add what he likes to the articles as long as he can source it. Remember there are also BLP implications from making claims about living figures without sources. If he can source any of his claims, great, let's get them in there, otherwise it has to stay out. --87.112.29.180 (talk) 15:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. Let's stick to the facts. Barlow wrote the songs. It is clear that the songs were later licensed for the musical, and we can say that in the intro. Then we can give the information that the band disclaimed involvement in the musical lower down in the article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I would say it's unnecessary to get into it in the lede or anywhere before the synopsis. Barlow wrote the music and lyrics -- this is both true and verifiable. That should go in the lede, unqualified.

The question I have in all of this is how did their music get licensed tho they weren't involved? I understand the finer points of the music business -- that they probably sold the rights during some lean years -- but the average reader may not. Let's tell the whole story, here. If we have verifiable facts that the sold the rights, coupled with a quote from the Times about their disinvolvement, I would say that that infomation is more or less unimpugnable. —  MusicMaker5376 16:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

If you read the article (and a google search will bring up lots of others), they licensed the music in 2005 before they had gotten back together. Once the band re-formed and became successful again, apparently they regretted having approved the musical. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Unrelated issue

{{editprotected}}

This article should be moved to Never Forget (musical) to conform with capitalization standards. —  MusicMaker5376 16:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Done - Nabla (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Synopsis

Now that that's over, can we get back to expanding the article? With respect to the synopsis, please describe Act II more. Also, is the audition that we refer to the audition for Ron, or the audition for the competition? What happens after Annie arrives? The synopsis should contain a complete plot summary of all the action in the script, and it should name the songs as it describes what happens before and after each song. Please divide the summary into Act I and Act II. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I've had another crack - bearing in mind I'm no writer please feel free to improve/correct. I'll get going on Act 2 as soon as I get a chance. Light Defender (talk) 11:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

More Act 2 to follow Light Defender (talk) 13:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, great job. --87.113.67.142 (talk) 13:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, very nice! Only five songs to go. I made a few edits, mostly to eliminate repetition and to take out references to stage directions and technical issues (e.g., "blackout"; "The scene fades to...."), which are not generally mentioned in plot synopses - the synopsis should work just as well for a future production using the same script as it does for the current production. You can just tell us where each new scene takes place: "Back at the pub...." Great work. I am upgrading the article from "stub" class to "start" class. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm done with the story, just adding some links back to the actual songs pages (is that ok?) - Your edits to act 1 are great - I can't help using stage/technical talk (thats my background) as long as you're happy editing it out of act 2. Cheers again Light Defender (talk) 15:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, this is a heck of a little article now. A nice accomplishment! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Additional music/Fansite in External link

I just discovered (doing links to songs) a couple of the numbers are just Take That covers, the music actually written by other people - for example the opening number was originally written by Barry Manilow and Adrienne Anderson - Should I be mentioning them in the main info box? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Light Defender (talk • contribs) 16:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Not in the infobox, but in the opening paragraph, as "....with additional music by x and y, and additional lyrics by x and y." -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

official fansite is authorised by the producers - they sent me the link - but it doesn't need to say official? Light Defender (talk) 17:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if it should say official or not. No big deal - it seems OK. You decide. I just wanted to understand what it meant. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Next step for article

The next thing this article needs, if you want to take it further, is a description of the history/genesis of the musical -- that is, how did it come to be written and produced. Whose idea was it to license the music and create the show, how did they do it, how did they assemble the team and cast, what problems did they have along the way? Hair (musical) contains such a section. Of course, there may not be sources available for all this information, but often there are interviews with the producers, etc. But it may be better to wait a while until the current issue with the band is resolved and the show is up and running for a while at the Savoy. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Show Dates and Timings

I was wishing to add show dates & times as shown below:

• Booking From: Wednesday, 07 May 2008
• Booking Until: Saturday, 25 October 2008
• Matinees: Monday to Thursday & Saturday 7.45pm, Friday 8.30pm
• Evenings: Fridays 5.30pm & Saturdays 3.00pm

Referencing: http://www.discounttheatre.com/page/5/show/1133/Never_Forget.htm

Could you tell me if this was appropriate to go ahead with? Or if not, why? Thank You, John A25130177 (talk) 14:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello. No, this is not appropriate material in Wikipedia. We do not advertise shows, rather we describe their historical and cultural importance. A good question to ask yourself is, will this information be important long after the show has closed? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

References

Plot

The synopsis on this page does not mention that the band is a Take That tribute act, or that the boys cast are look-a-likes representing Take That. Should this be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.242.194.144 (talk) 13:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)