884:
script. The source is not the same. Battles may be fought again, by the same sides, over the same thing, but they will not be exactly the same people, making the same moves. There is no material source which can be re-presented in its accurate entirety. The musicals, on the other hand, have a written libretto which can be re-presented, word-for-word (and some actions-for-actions, too, from stage directions). The exact same source can be re-staged. The continuity of that source material adds a third layer to this, and the disambiguation is required
209:
515:, there were two versions that featured music by different composers: Armit wrote the first score, but the second version replaced that whole score with a new one that used music taken from a catalogue of existing operas by multiple composers, none of whom wrote any of that music for this musical. Hence, Hill has a stronger connection to the material, and the others get to be named in the body of the article.
150:
199:
181:
119:
768:(Deane, Balderston play)" will be accepted if only because everyone has heard of 1924, but probably not many of Deane or Balderston. Dates are used this way in other media and subject area, and generally are more helpful to the reader. For example, titling battles with disambiguating names of the combatants or commanders won't be popular. Also, you have a very different idea of
275:
1367:, which should both follow NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs), have parenthetical disambiguators with a different structure; the article title of the Metastasio libretto "should" follow NCB, but doesn't (in fact it implicitly follows NCO); the picture book article has a redundant "Pirotta" in its parenthetical disambiguator; the
389:
For theatre in particular, it's extremely important for writers to be paid in this way. Commission fees are not hugely substantial, for obvious reasons: most theatre productions have limited runs, because that's how the financial model works, but the writer is afforded more chances to have their work
921:
I want a system that makes the most sense, which is to disambiguate a theatre work by something that is directly connected to it, not one step removed. Surely people will search based on title? And then most would, I imagine, just be guessing about year, whereas they might have a shot at recognising
902:
I think that, for purposes of a general readership encyclopedia, the current naming system is easier for people to search and understand. As the saying goes, when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. This is the case here: BessieMaelstrom is a writer, so she wants to emphasize
832:
Those are not reinterpretations of the same battle. They are separate events with the same name: it's a two-layered thing, and the dates identify the second layer. The various 'Phantoms' are all reinterpretations of the same original source, so that's a three-layered thing: the original source, the
645:
Going back in history to a time when publishing was a far smaller industry than it is now, and where material written by multiple people whose names we don't know was put together with speed for the purpose of one production, there we could title as per production - not least because those specific
531:
In response to those who might say that a script is merely a template for performance, I say: a novel uses one form of written description to tell a story, and a script uses another form of written description to tell a story, but the purpose of both is to tell a story. A script that has never been
1405:
on those you think that should change. It is unlikely guidance will be written or rewritten before there is a series WP:RMs with consistent result, and broad consensus. Be prepared to be disappointed. Some of the titles you proposed above are, for instance, longer and less recognisable (thus going
564:
So we can see a film again, but we cannot ever see the 1924 staging of Deane's play
Dracula again. At least, not with the same actors, at those same ages. One could see a new production of it, and that production would likely not merit its own article, so it would go into the article for the play.
523:
The other important fact about a play script or libretto which supports this listing by author's name is that a script is also a book that can be read. It is printed like a book, and is sold as a book. Stage publishers make scripts available for sale, and the writer/s receive a royalty on the sale
1385:
Here's the catch: there's only so much that naming conventions guidelines can do, the rest follows from practice, that is how
Knowledge (XXG) editors give titles to articles (hopefully as much as possible in keeping with the general principles of WP:AT). New guidance can be written (or is implied
883:
Yes, there are also multiple things by the same name here. The films are noted as films, and further by year, given that there's more than one film. Those specific films, like those specific battles, will never have their exact same source re-presented. Movie remakes have the same story but a new
559:
Film companies tend to do one deal where they acquire all possible rights (including stage - and rights for "any media yet to be invented"!) for a very long period of time. Film contracts have unhealthy, overly possessive relationships with film scripts, so additional film adaptations of the same
406:
What we're talking about here is the work of writer - the product of writing, the primary source and the original topic of all productions - and how we should title that so we can best represent the life of that work, which is the only everlasting thing in the world of theatre. Everything else is
791:
you're talking about is a method that is in more frequent usage than saying "1986". And, as above, the work can be reproduced in several different productions of one adaptation. Where there are multiples, the foundation of the two things is always going to be the underlying work: "Phantom of the
786:
I couldn't figure out how to make something be an internal link to an article, and only italicise the title section of the link. I have removed the links now, in favour of italicising, but am always happy to learn. (And yes, I did try to look it up.) Ref: "everyone has heard of 1924" - we're not
535:
It is certainly not up to us as
Knowledge (XXG) editors to tell writers how they should be writing stories down. For example, playwrights are perfectly entitled to write stage directions that are crafted to be performed, and novelists are perfectly entitled to use footnotes as narrative tools.
527:
People do buy them to read, which is why there is a book sale royalty, and then a separate royalty which is a percentage from the licensing fee paid by people who want performing rights. Again, writers are paid one thing for the product itself, and another thing for the usage of that product.
739:(Am never sure how to tag myself when the thing I posted got split up into multiple sources, and I didn't intend it to look like I scribed a finished product. I'm still discovering Knowledge (XXG) editing. This is all here to re-open the discussion, that's all. --
402:
guarantee payment of a percentage of the fee whether or not the intended production actually happens. Fees are paid in installments, typically on commission, on delivery, and then on acceptance of what is delivered, the first two being non-recoupable.
449:, a play may be renowned for one specific production - but that is really exceptional. The script, the play itself is the underlying property and should be identified by the author/s, with specific productions itemised within the article.
385:
This process is only slightly different for different media. The fee can be a recoupable advance of future income: books typically pay an advance on royalties in this way, and plays sometimes have a recoupable portion of a commission fee.
986:(NCF)Β : e.g. for film adaptations of Broadway musicals (in which case the title of a separate Knowledge (XXG) article on the original theatre production may be disambiguated somewhat similar to those on the later film adaptation(s)).
792:
Opera" will always be the thing in more frequent usage, and it isn't defined by a year, it's defined by writers. (Edited to add) Battles cannot be repeated. They are unique events. So I'm not sure I understand the comparison? --
665:(musical) is correctly titled to distinguish it from the song of the same name that is part of the primary topic, even if not all of it. If anyone else writes a Spice Girls musical, then it could most usefully be retitled
655:, and other vaudeville, revue, or cabaret style shows that use a mixture of materials by many writers can be titled as per the actual production. Some are transient and unlikely to be repeated in the same exact form.
888:, in the same way that the year of the film or the battle disambiguates the source. A production is not the source. Different productions of the same musical or play can be disambiguated within the article. --
1381:
articles both appear to be, as currently written, about a particular theatre production, but their article titles, at least the parenthetical disambiguators in these titles, follow quite different principles.
693:
And finally: as with all such properties, the original source should be the regarded as the primary topic, and subsequent adaptations of any kind should be disambiguated. Excellent examples of this are on the
675:
was based on a compilation album of the same name, which is the primary source, but the musical is the more well-known of the two, giving it naming prominence. If that were not true, then it would be titled
382:
The former, the writing, is a job of work paid by commission fee. The latter, the commercial sales, earn the writer a royalty, which is a percentage of the profit made from the product they created.
398:
I say all this to make it very clear that the actual script you hold in your hand is a book that someone has been paid to write, regardless of whether or not it actually gets staged (or published).
833:
different adaptations of it, and then the different productions of each of those adaptations. The use of dates only works until two different adaptations have a production in the same year, as per
556:(2006 film): that will always be the way that that particular adaptation of the story is presented, so it can be identified that way, because it will never be anything other than that exact thing.
501:
With regard to the order of names, the simplest way is alphabetical, not least because different pairings in a musical theatre writing team might co-create any one element of book, music, lyrics.
371:
Some written works are crafted to facilitate reproduction through performance, whether live or recorded. The work of a writer in this instance is regarded by the creative industries in two ways:
39:
922:βLloyd-Webberβ whether or not they know much about theatre, donβt you think? (Also, note that I am supportive of using years instead of authors for films, because that does make more sense.) β-
410:
To list plays by their productions therefore makes no sense at all. Where there is any need for disambiguation, the play - the underlying material itself, not the production - should be listed
633:
In an earlier discussion, someone mentioned that the libretto of a traditional
Broadway-style musical is referred to in the industry as "The Book". This is true, and is already noted on the
560:
property are far, far less frequent and pretty much always have brand new scripts. Plus screenplays are rarely made available to be read (legally, anyway) for the same possessive reasons.
288:
106:
102:
98:
735:(Fellowes, Sherman Bros, Stiles & Drewe musical) some day - because come the year 2066, when the books go out of copyright, you can bet there will be new stage adaptations.
504:
Where there is a writing team who already use a well-known 'team name', that should be respected, not least because common usage might well lead to a single article here (eg:
723:(book series) is correctly titled because, although it is the primary source, it's only the title of the very first book, and the article is about the whole series of books.
772:, which won't be popular. Generally, I'd get more content editing experience before launching other complicated policy proposals - I see you've done at least one other.
436:, or which notable directors have made notable staging choices. None of those things require a separate article because those people will already have their own articles.
110:
310:
847:, both based on the same original source, both produced on Broadway simultaneously. (Oh, I've just seen how to italicise these links. Excellent. I'll do that.) --
390:
staged and therefore earn more money. Part of the craft of playwriting is to create a work that does not inhibit creative re-interpretation in the staging of it.
74:
1222:
1361:
1088:
658:
Catalogue or jukebox musicals based on multiple works by a single artist should use the name of the bookwriter and the name of that artist or catalogue:
1051:
975:
760:
I don't think much of this will be accepted. It' a pity you don't italicize titles in it all. In particular I very much doubt that changes like "
80:
1476:
but I'm not sure if a new section is warranted here. It doesn't look to be a widespread problem, or even a problem at all, and I'm always wary of
1346:
1333:
461:
983:
969:
963:
695:
355:
In general, plays, musicals and operas can and should be treated as books with regard to article titles. They are equally proper nouns, and thus
24:
1526:). "Treatise"? Never seen that as a disambiguator. "Book"? Seems to be frowned on by some here and sounds a little weird for this one. β
229:
1368:
1240:
1589:
1410:#1 and #4 of the WP:AT policy), and thus will likely not get the upper hand in a WP:RM. All in all little future for these ideas, imho. --
293:
966:(NCB): e.g. for plays that were published as a book, librettos, novels that were subsequently transformed into a theatre production, etc.
1594:
1012:
474:
1544:, you can use just that, with a hatnote on each article. Otherwise, I do see "treatise" used on a couple of articles in that category.
233:
1231:
834:
20:
787:
identifying a year, though, we're identifying a theatrical work. Arguably, saying "Lloyd-Webber" to identify which adaptation of
69:
1340:
1163:
161:
866:
865:
is a good example - 8 works, only four of which are "related" by source/story. Personally, I'd say the musicals should be
841:
1477:
223:
186:
60:
1519:
1280:
1271:
1375:
1323:
1289:
1067:
378:
the subsequent commercial exploitation of that property (eg: the selling of it, the staging of it, the screening of it)
1354:
1058:
1019:
532:
performed still coherently and dramatically tells the whole story, and novels are frequently performed as audiobooks.
1415:
118:
93:
1454:
1434:
927:
893:
852:
797:
744:
457:
Where there are several adaptations of the same source material, they should additionally be titled by author/s:
342:
318:
1494:
Update: I've found only 3 other articles on WP using "poetry book", all created last year by the same editor as
861:"They are separate events with the same name" - of course, but that makes no difference for our naming policy.
769:
129:
1198:
1189:
1180:
704:
399:
1449:
Should we add a section as to the standard disambiguating words to be used in titles? For example now we have
1247:
1216:
1082:
505:
167:
1425:
Am taking my time to consider all this, and will reply properly - but I wanted to say thank you for spending
1145:
815:
611:
1298:
1262:
1253:
1154:
903:
writers' names. But that is not how most people will search for a play or film. Unusual situations like
358:
50:
1411:
1077:
1028:
634:
552:
Films are exactly the same forever, which plays (other than The
Mousetrap!) are not. One can always see
352:
I'm a published playwright and librettist. Here is some industry info that should clarify this subject.
1407:
282:
65:
1215:β NCB (?), although arguably there is no specific article titling guidance, thus only WP:AT (e.g. its
511:
And where there is an unusual circumstance, common sense can prevail. In Hill's musical adaptation of
313:
with regard to capitalising titles of written works, because I think we need some greater clarity. --
133:
1450:
1430:
923:
889:
848:
793:
740:
439:
Even where a production is itself notable, like London's everlasting production of Agatha
Christie's
338:
314:
237:
1571:
1553:
1534:
1507:
1489:
1466:
1438:
1419:
931:
916:
897:
878:
856:
827:
801:
781:
748:
346:
322:
1564:
1527:
1462:
761:
598:
585:
572:
432:
With regard to very significant productions of plays, eg: Shakespeare, the tendency is to focus on
1472:
Looking through a few categories, it seems that "poetry collection" is the usual form. I've moved
1549:
1503:
1485:
1125:
1102:
912:
713:
625:
Yes, we will end up with longer titles, but they are really the only accurate titles we can use.
134:
637:. It seems irrelevant with regard to naming conventions, since the term is not commonly known.
874:
823:
807:
777:
646:
plays were not particularly crafted to be repeated, so they weren't captured in the same way.
487:
46:
286:
for
Knowledge (XXG)'s procedural policy on the creation of new guidelines and policies. See
651:
131:
1043:
1402:
1387:
952:
1458:
1308:
1004:
862:
956:
1583:
1558:
1545:
1523:
1499:
1481:
1116:
908:
441:
375:
the actual craft, the work of writing the property (eg: the book, the play, the film)
208:
1173:
994:
870:
819:
811:
773:
214:
951:
The over-all framework for how article titles are chosen in
Knowledge (XXG) is at
274:
1316:
1212:
204:
1518:
What would be a good disambiguator for an agricultural treatise from 1688 (
972:(NCM): e.g. for musicals, etc., with some specific subsidiary guidance at,
198:
180:
1139:
548:
Screenplays (film scripts) differ from theatre scripts in two main ways.
433:
708:
is correctly titled as the source material and therefore primary topic
228:. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can
1246:β no specific article titling guidance, thus only WP:AT (e.g. its
1109:
1081:β no specific article titling guidance, thus only WP:AT (e.g. its
717:
is correctly titled as there is no other candidate for that title
1393:
So here's my recommendation to BessieMaelstrom: if a number of
1353:
As you can see, there's a wide variety of possibilities, e.g.
869:, unless the musicals project has some particular convention.
680:(musical) and if there were another with the same title, then
269:
143:
135:
15:
1250:
section) and WP:D (if disambiguation would be needed) apply.
1219:
section) and WP:D (if disambiguation would be needed) apply.
1085:
section) and WP:D (if disambiguation would be needed) apply.
292:
for recommendations regarding the creation and updating of
1390:
shows a consistent result, with a fairly broad consensus.
1540:
Does it need a disambiguator? If the treatise's title is
536:
Personally, I put jokes in my stage directions that are
955:. For ambiguous article titles, additional guidance at
1401:-related (etc) article titles irk you, then initiate
445:, it really doesn't need a separate article. As with
1522:)? I am only disambiguating it from the base name (
540:meant to be read by the person reading the script.
434:which notable performers have played the big roles
453:Multiple adaptations of the same source material
160:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s
907:can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. --
684:(Gran, Marks, 50s & 60s jukebox musical).
289:how to contribute to Knowledge (XXG) guidance
8:
1295:β NCM (Β§ Compositions (classical music)) (?)
1237:β NCM (Β§ Compositions (classical music)) (?)
976:Knowledge (XXG):Naming conventions (operas)
984:Knowledge (XXG):Naming conventions (films)
970:Knowledge (XXG):Naming conventions (music)
964:Knowledge (XXG):Naming conventions (books)
236:. To use this banner, please refer to the
175:
669:(Saunders, Spice Girls catalogue musical)
1386:without being written) when a series of
1304:β NCM (Β§ Compositions (classical music))
1228:β NCM (Β§ Compositions (classical music))
1177:β NCM (Β§ Compositions (classical music))
1052:West Side Story (Original Broadway Cast)
1016:β NCM (Β§ Compositions (classical music))
519:Play scripts and libretti are also books
234:discuss matters related to book articles
1347:Cinderella (Steven Curtis Chapman song)
1334:Cinderella, or the Little Glass Slipper
867:The Wild Party (2000 musical, LaChiusa)
328:Article Titles: Plays, Musicals, Operas
177:
1429:time going through this in detail. --
1055:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs) (?)
471:(Hart, Stilgoe, Lloyd-Webber musical)
359:lowercase second and subsequent words
7:
149:
147:
1013:Porgy and Bess: A Symphonic Picture
367:Craft & commercial exploitation
166:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
14:
1349:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
1343:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
1329:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
1226:(Rodgers and Hammerstein musical)
1186:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
1094:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
1073:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
1025:β NCM (Β§ Bands, albums and songs)
246:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Books
220:This page is within the scope of
45:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
731:(musical) will likely be titled
727:(film) is correctly titled, but
273:
207:
197:
179:
148:
117:
40:Click here to start a new topic.
1341:Cinderella (Lionel Richie song)
621:(Hes, Borovec, Svoboda musical)
959:. Topic-specific guidance at:
649:Stage productions such as the
1:
1508:22:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
1490:21:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
1467:20:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
1445:Standard disambiguating words
37:Put new text under old text.
1457:for the same type of books.
689:Primary and secondary topics
400:Hard-won industry agreements
1590:Project-Class Book articles
1365:(Oscar Peterson Trio album)
1092:(Oscar Peterson Trio album)
641:Patchwork stage productions
484:(Hill, Armit et al musical)
407:(deliberately!) transient.
1611:
1595:WikiProject Books articles
1372:(2013 Broadway production)
1244:(2013 Broadway production)
702:The article for the novel
249:Template:WikiProject Books
25:Naming conventions (books)
1572:16:28, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
1554:23:37, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
1535:15:14, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
682:Dreamboats and Petticoats
678:Dreamboats and Petticoats
506:Rodgers & Hammerstein
192:
174:
75:Be welcoming to newcomers
1439:22:19, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
1420:09:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
932:21:10, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
917:20:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
898:19:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
879:17:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
857:15:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
828:15:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
802:14:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
782:13:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
749:02:44, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
705:The Phantom of the Opera
673:Dreamboats and Petticoat
635:book disambiguation page
582:(Deane, Balderston play)
469:The Phantom of the Opera
463:The Phantom of the Opera
363:does not apply to them.
347:02:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
323:22:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
305:Ref Article Title Format
1498:, so I've moved all 3.
816:Siege of Constantinople
806:On the last point, see
595:(Godber, Thornton play)
497:(Kopek, Yeston musical)
1235:(Lloyd Webber musical)
1167:(Pirotta picture book)
818:, to name but three.
698:, but to be specific:
394:The product of writing
70:avoid personal attacks
1078:West Side Story Suite
629:The book of a musical
111:Auto-archiving period
1478:WP:Instruction creep
1395:Phantom of the Opera
482:Phantom of the Opera
476:Phantom of the Opera
294:policy and guideline
762:Dracula (1924 play)
711:The musical called
1284:(2015 Indian film)
1275:(2015 Disney film)
1103:Siroe (Metastasio)
838:(LaChiusa musical)
714:The Crinoline Girl
162:content assessment
81:dispute resolution
42:
1574:
1455:poetry collection
1379:(Fitinhof-Schell)
1327:(2013 cast album)
1293:(Fitinhof-Schell)
808:Battle of Panipat
538:specifically only
428:Significant works
311:a discussion here
300:
299:
268:
267:
264:
263:
260:
259:
224:WikiProject Books
142:
141:
61:Assume good faith
38:
1602:
1569:
1562:
1532:
1412:Francis Schonken
978:(NCO): for opera
696:film naming page
652:Ziegfeld Follies
277:
270:
254:
253:
250:
247:
244:
230:join the project
217:
212:
211:
201:
194:
193:
183:
176:
153:
152:
151:
144:
136:
122:
121:
112:
16:
1610:
1609:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1580:
1579:
1565:
1528:
1516:
1447:
1431:BessieMaelstrom
1363:West Side Story
1090:West Side Story
1069:West Side Story
1060:West Side Story
1044:West Side Story
924:BessieMaelstrom
890:BessieMaelstrom
886:for that source
849:BessieMaelstrom
845:(Lippa musical)
794:BessieMaelstrom
770:WP:PRIMARYTOPIC
757:
741:BessieMaelstrom
691:
643:
631:
615:(Czech musical)
546:
521:
455:
430:
396:
369:
339:BessieMaelstrom
335:
330:
315:BessieMaelstrom
307:
251:
248:
245:
242:
241:
213:
206:
138:
137:
132:
109:
87:
86:
56:
12:
11:
5:
1608:
1606:
1598:
1597:
1592:
1582:
1581:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1575:
1515:
1512:
1511:
1510:
1492:
1446:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1428:
1356:Porgy and Bess
1351:
1350:
1344:
1338:
1330:
1321:
1313:
1309:La Cenerentola
1305:
1296:
1287:
1278:
1269:
1260:
1251:
1248:WP:ITALICTITLE
1238:
1229:
1220:
1217:WP:ITALICTITLE
1206:
1205:
1196:
1187:
1184:(Miyavi album)
1178:
1170:
1161:
1152:
1149:(Lackey novel)
1143:
1133:
1132:
1123:
1114:
1106:
1096:
1095:
1086:
1083:WP:ITALICTITLE
1074:
1065:
1056:
1048:
1036:
1035:
1030:Porgy and Bess
1026:
1021:Porgy and Bess
1017:
1009:
1005:Porgy and Bess
1001:
988:
987:
981:
980:
979:
967:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
887:
863:The Wild Party
843:The Wild Party
836:The Wild Party
756:
753:
737:
736:
718:
709:
690:
687:
686:
685:
670:
642:
639:
630:
627:
623:
622:
609:
596:
583:
562:
561:
557:
545:
542:
539:
520:
517:
514:
499:
498:
485:
478:(1976 musical)
472:
465:(1986 musical)
454:
451:
429:
426:
395:
392:
380:
379:
376:
368:
365:
334:
331:
329:
326:
306:
303:
298:
297:
278:
266:
265:
262:
261:
258:
257:
255:
219:
218:
202:
190:
189:
184:
172:
171:
165:
154:
140:
139:
130:
128:
127:
124:
123:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
72:
63:
57:
55:
54:
43:
34:
33:
30:
29:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1607:
1596:
1593:
1591:
1588:
1587:
1585:
1573:
1570:
1568:
1560:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1542:Flower Mirror
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1533:
1531:
1525:
1524:Flower mirror
1521:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1497:
1493:
1491:
1487:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1470:
1469:
1468:
1464:
1460:
1459:Ali Pirhayati
1456:
1452:
1444:
1440:
1436:
1432:
1426:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1404:
1400:
1396:
1391:
1389:
1383:
1380:
1378:
1373:
1371:
1366:
1364:
1359:
1357:
1348:
1345:
1342:
1339:
1336:
1335:
1331:
1328:
1326:
1322:
1319:
1318:
1314:
1311:
1310:
1306:
1303:
1301:
1297:
1294:
1292:
1288:
1285:
1283:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1270:
1267:
1265:
1261:
1258:
1256:
1252:
1249:
1245:
1243:
1239:
1236:
1234:
1230:
1227:
1225:
1221:
1218:
1214:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1203:
1201:
1197:
1194:
1192:
1188:
1185:
1183:
1179:
1176:
1175:
1171:
1168:
1166:
1162:
1159:
1158:(Tyers novel)
1157:
1153:
1150:
1148:
1144:
1141:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1130:
1128:
1124:
1121:
1119:
1115:
1112:
1111:
1107:
1104:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:And another:
1093:
1091:
1087:
1084:
1080:
1079:
1075:
1072:
1070:
1066:
1063:
1061:
1057:
1054:
1053:
1049:
1046:
1045:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1033:
1031:
1027:
1024:
1022:
1018:
1015:
1014:
1010:
1007:
1006:
1002:
999:
997:
993:
992:
991:
985:
982:
977:
974:
973:
971:
968:
965:
962:
961:
960:
958:
954:
933:
929:
925:
920:
919:
918:
914:
910:
906:
901:
900:
899:
895:
891:
885:
882:
881:
880:
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
859:
858:
854:
850:
846:
844:
839:
837:
831:
830:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
809:
805:
804:
803:
799:
795:
790:
785:
784:
783:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
759:
758:
754:
752:
750:
746:
742:
734:
730:
726:
722:
719:
716:
715:
710:
707:
706:
701:
700:
699:
697:
688:
683:
679:
674:
671:
668:
667:Viva Forever!
664:
663:Viva Forever!
661:
660:
659:
656:
654:
653:
647:
640:
638:
636:
628:
626:
620:
616:
614:
610:
607:
603:
601:
597:
594:
590:
588:
584:
581:
577:
575:
571:
570:
569:
566:
558:
555:
551:
550:
549:
543:
541:
537:
533:
529:
525:
518:
516:
512:
509:
507:
502:
496:
492:
490:
486:
483:
479:
477:
473:
470:
466:
464:
460:
459:
458:
452:
450:
448:
447:The Mousetrap
444:
443:
442:The Mousetrap
437:
435:
427:
425:
423:
421:
416:
414:
408:
404:
401:
393:
391:
387:
383:
377:
374:
373:
372:
366:
364:
362:
360:
353:
350:
348:
344:
340:
337:(This is all
332:
327:
325:
324:
320:
316:
312:
309:I've started
304:
302:
295:
291:
290:
285:
284:
279:
276:
272:
271:
256:
252:Book articles
239:
238:documentation
235:
231:
227:
226:
225:
216:
210:
205:
203:
200:
196:
195:
191:
188:
185:
182:
178:
173:
169:
163:
159:
155:
146:
145:
126:
125:
120:
116:
108:
104:
100:
97:
95:
91:
90:
82:
78:
76:
73:
71:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
52:
48:
47:Learn to edit
44:
41:
36:
35:
32:
31:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1566:
1541:
1529:
1517:
1495:
1473:
1448:
1398:
1397:-related or
1394:
1392:
1384:
1376:
1369:
1362:
1358:(1950 album)
1355:
1352:
1332:
1324:
1315:
1307:
1299:
1290:
1281:
1272:
1263:
1254:
1241:
1232:
1223:
1208:A last one:
1207:
1200:The Firebird
1199:
1191:The Firebird
1190:
1181:
1174:The Firebird
1172:
1164:
1155:
1146:
1134:
1129:(Errichelli)
1126:
1117:
1108:
1097:
1089:
1076:
1071:(soundtrack)
1068:
1059:
1050:
1042:
1037:
1029:
1023:(1950 album)
1020:
1011:
1003:
995:
989:
950:
904:
842:
835:
812:Sack of Rome
788:
765:
738:
733:Mary Poppins
732:
729:Mary Poppins
728:
725:Mary Poppins
724:
721:Mary Poppins
720:
712:
703:
692:
681:
677:
672:
666:
662:
657:
650:
648:
644:
632:
624:
618:
612:
608:(Dietz play)
605:
599:
592:
586:
579:
573:
567:
563:
553:
547:
534:
530:
526:
522:
510:
503:
500:
494:
488:
481:
475:
468:
462:
456:
446:
440:
438:
431:
419:
418:
412:
411:
409:
405:
397:
388:
384:
381:
370:
356:
354:
351:
336:
308:
301:
287:
281:
222:
221:
215:Books portal
168:WikiProjects
158:project page
157:
114:
92:
19:This is the
1451:poetry book
1408:WP:CRITERIA
1302:(Prokofiev)
1266:(1950 film)
1257:(1947 film)
1202:(1952 film)
1193:(1934 film)
1062:(1961 film)
602:(1996 play)
589:(1995 play)
576:(1924 play)
568:Therefore:
544:Screenplays
283:WP:PROPOSAL
1584:Categories
1377:Cinderella
1370:Cinderella
1325:Cinderella
1317:Cendrillon
1300:Cinderella
1291:Cinderella
1282:Cinderella
1273:Cinderella
1264:Cinderella
1255:Cinderella
1242:Cinderella
1233:Cinderella
1224:Cinderella
1213:Cinderella
1135:One more:
905:Wild Party
764:should be
755:Discussion
617:should be
604:should be
591:should be
578:should be
493:should be
480:should be
467:should be
1567:AjaxSmack
1530:AjaxSmack
1182:Fire Bird
1047:β NCM (?)
1038:Another:
990:Example:
491:(musical)
422:(musical)
83:if needed
66:Be polite
21:talk page
1561:Thanks.
1546:Station1
1500:Station1
1482:Station1
1406:against
1165:Firebird
1156:Firebird
1147:Firebird
1140:Firebird
909:Ssilvers
814:, &
94:Archives
51:get help
1399:Dracula
1120:(Hasse)
871:Johnbod
820:Johnbod
789:Phantom
774:Johnbod
766:Dracula
619:Dracula
613:Dracula
606:Dracula
600:Dracula
593:Dracula
587:Dracula
580:Dracula
574:Dracula
554:Dracula
524:price.
513:Phantom
495:Phantom
489:Phantom
115:90Β days
1496:Manasi
1474:Manasi
1403:WP:RMs
1388:WP:RMs
1142:β WP:D
1032:(film)
998:(play)
840:, and
415:(play)
296:pages.
164:scale.
1514:Redux
1337:β NCB
1320:β NCO
1312:β NCO
1286:β NCF
1277:β NCF
1268:β NCF
1259:β NCF
1204:β NCF
1195:β NCF
1169:β NCB
1160:β NCB
1151:β NCB
1131:β NCO
1127:Siroe
1122:β NCO
1118:Siroe
1113:β NCO
1110:Siroe
1105:β NCB
1064:β NCF
1034:β NCF
1008:β NCO
1000:β NCB
996:Porgy
953:WP:AT
420:Title
413:Title
333:Input
243:Books
187:Books
156:This
79:Seek
27:page.
1550:talk
1504:talk
1486:talk
1480:. -
1463:talk
1453:and
1435:talk
1427:your
1416:talk
1374:and
1360:and
957:WP:D
928:talk
913:talk
894:talk
875:talk
853:talk
824:talk
798:talk
778:talk
745:talk
343:talk
319:talk
280:See
232:and
68:and
751:))
508:).
417:or
1586::
1563:β
1552:)
1520:θ±ι‘
1506:)
1488:)
1465:)
1437:)
1418:)
930:)
915:)
896:)
877:)
855:)
826:)
810:,
800:)
780:)
747:)
424:.
349:)
345:)
321:)
113::
105:,
101:,
49:;
1559:β
1548:(
1502:(
1484:(
1461:(
1433:(
1414:(
926:(
911:(
892:(
873:(
851:(
822:(
796:(
776:(
743:(
361:"
357:"
341:(
317:(
240:.
170::
107:3
103:2
99:1
96::
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
