This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Yes, but if it's class Start, where are the Plot and Cast sections? They were there, but were "condensed" into the intro: [1]. Hoverfish Talk 23:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to improve the plot summary for this article. However, instead of starting from scratch, I'd like to copy/paste the material from the plot summary of the original show to the plot summary of the film. I'll alter it to include the major changes. Since I wrote most of the original plot summary, and it's reasonably good quality, it seems foolish to rewrite the parts that are the same for the film. Is this ok? MarianKroy ( talk) 18:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The following sentence is in the lede section:
Ironically, Barbra Streisand lost the 1964 Tony Award (as a nominee for her role in Funny Girl) to Carol Channing, who originated the role of Dolly Levi in the Broadway production.
Again, I don't mean to be too aggressive (only bold) but does this really belong in the lede, if anywhere in the article? It's a little bit of an irrelevant fact, because although both Channing and Streisand played Levi in versions of the musical, the statement itself really doesn't have anything to do with the film itself. Thoughts? — Mizu onna sango15 Hello! 18:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
...Just for accuracy's sake, didn't Horace actually fire Cornelius and Barnaby, but then they told Vandergelder he couldn't fire them because they quit first? I don't think it's an incredibly big deal, but it would be more correct, anyway. Cheers, — Mizu onna sango15 Hello! 02:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC).
I'm not sure if this would be more than trivia, but certain sets from "Hello, Dolly!" were reused in other films. I know some shots from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid were filmed on sets from "Hello, Dolly!", while other films may have used said sets as well. Orville Eastland ( talk) 22:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Which version of the box office section should be used in the article?
There has been a recent spate of edits to the box office section, replacing sourced content with unsourced claims and misrepresenting/misinterpretating the data: [2]
I am going to tackle the problems one by one:
By all means, feel free to expand the section, but it is important to supply sources for any claim, and it is important to not misrepresent the sales data we currently do have. Betty Logan ( talk) 08:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Film gross at the box office, and film rentals are two entirely different amounts. A film can gross at the box office 3 or four times wht it did in rentals. If you bother to look at the top grossing film rankings for 1969 according to Variety, it ranked at number 4. They do not split the box office gross with the distributors, they receive a percentage. When Hello, Dolly! was playing in the theaters, it was a percentage deal for them as well, not a flat fee. The barometer that is uses to determine a films success is, it would have to gross double its production costs, to also cover distribution and advertising costs.The budget of this film is estimated at between 20 and 25 million, I have never heard an exact figure. So lets say it cost 25 million. It would have needed to gross 50 million to break even, which it did, leaving a profit, albeit small but still profit of 9 million. And all of these grosses are only domestic figures, there is nothing on what it did worldwide. It also sold over a million copies on video, if it had not been successful in sles it would nto have been released on Blue-ray. The fact is this film's gross may have been disappointing, but it was not the big failure people have been led to beleive it was, and it was a commercial success. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.91.110 ( talk) 20:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Other editors participating in this survey should acquaint themselves with industry terminology before commenting. The concept of rentals (sometimes referred to as "distributor rentals" or "distributor gross") is described more thoroughly by Box Office Mojo (under "Gross"), Cones, p.41 and Cohen, Backstage. I must reiterate again we are not discussing home video revenues here; the "rentals" are a historic box office metric used by industry, and in the case of many older films the box office gross we are familiar with today isn't known. Betty Logan ( talk) 08:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Editors should indicate their preference for version 1 or version 2 of the text here.
Last week Coretheapple removed poorly sourced puffery. Of the sites he removed one was a hobby site ( http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com) while another was a blog ( http://www.onstageblog.com/columns/2015/8/9/the-top-100-greatest-movie-musicals-of-all-time) and thus both failing to meet the criteria as reliable sources as outlined at WP:SPS, and one was a dead link ( http://www.ranthollywood.com). An anonymous editor is repeatedly restoring these links to promote a non-neutral point of view. To the IP's credit they have included a new link ( http://www.afi.com/Docs/100Years/musicals_ballot.pdf), but the problem is this link does not corroborate the claim. It is a ballot for the AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies, and the problem here is that it did not make the cut. I fully support Coretheapple's decision to remove this cruft because it was highly promotional and very poorly sourced. For claims of this nature we need sources to credible polls (along the lines of the AFI survey) to include claims of this nature. Betty Logan ( talk) 06:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
In regards to the latest edit at Hello, Dolly! (film) (by the now blocked sock) I don't actually have a problem with the MTV source. However I do have a problem with the opinion of a single publication being presented as a universal critical consensus, so I have stripped out the other non-reliable sources and moved the claim to the critical reception section which is where it belongs. Betty Logan ( talk) 20:59, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
it looks like it might be technicolour. I came here to learn about the film, why is this information absent? 80.189.191.157 ( talk) 14:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Yes, but if it's class Start, where are the Plot and Cast sections? They were there, but were "condensed" into the intro: [1]. Hoverfish Talk 23:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to improve the plot summary for this article. However, instead of starting from scratch, I'd like to copy/paste the material from the plot summary of the original show to the plot summary of the film. I'll alter it to include the major changes. Since I wrote most of the original plot summary, and it's reasonably good quality, it seems foolish to rewrite the parts that are the same for the film. Is this ok? MarianKroy ( talk) 18:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
The following sentence is in the lede section:
Ironically, Barbra Streisand lost the 1964 Tony Award (as a nominee for her role in Funny Girl) to Carol Channing, who originated the role of Dolly Levi in the Broadway production.
Again, I don't mean to be too aggressive (only bold) but does this really belong in the lede, if anywhere in the article? It's a little bit of an irrelevant fact, because although both Channing and Streisand played Levi in versions of the musical, the statement itself really doesn't have anything to do with the film itself. Thoughts? — Mizu onna sango15 Hello! 18:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
...Just for accuracy's sake, didn't Horace actually fire Cornelius and Barnaby, but then they told Vandergelder he couldn't fire them because they quit first? I don't think it's an incredibly big deal, but it would be more correct, anyway. Cheers, — Mizu onna sango15 Hello! 02:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC).
I'm not sure if this would be more than trivia, but certain sets from "Hello, Dolly!" were reused in other films. I know some shots from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid were filmed on sets from "Hello, Dolly!", while other films may have used said sets as well. Orville Eastland ( talk) 22:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Which version of the box office section should be used in the article?
There has been a recent spate of edits to the box office section, replacing sourced content with unsourced claims and misrepresenting/misinterpretating the data: [2]
I am going to tackle the problems one by one:
By all means, feel free to expand the section, but it is important to supply sources for any claim, and it is important to not misrepresent the sales data we currently do have. Betty Logan ( talk) 08:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Film gross at the box office, and film rentals are two entirely different amounts. A film can gross at the box office 3 or four times wht it did in rentals. If you bother to look at the top grossing film rankings for 1969 according to Variety, it ranked at number 4. They do not split the box office gross with the distributors, they receive a percentage. When Hello, Dolly! was playing in the theaters, it was a percentage deal for them as well, not a flat fee. The barometer that is uses to determine a films success is, it would have to gross double its production costs, to also cover distribution and advertising costs.The budget of this film is estimated at between 20 and 25 million, I have never heard an exact figure. So lets say it cost 25 million. It would have needed to gross 50 million to break even, which it did, leaving a profit, albeit small but still profit of 9 million. And all of these grosses are only domestic figures, there is nothing on what it did worldwide. It also sold over a million copies on video, if it had not been successful in sles it would nto have been released on Blue-ray. The fact is this film's gross may have been disappointing, but it was not the big failure people have been led to beleive it was, and it was a commercial success. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.91.110 ( talk) 20:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Other editors participating in this survey should acquaint themselves with industry terminology before commenting. The concept of rentals (sometimes referred to as "distributor rentals" or "distributor gross") is described more thoroughly by Box Office Mojo (under "Gross"), Cones, p.41 and Cohen, Backstage. I must reiterate again we are not discussing home video revenues here; the "rentals" are a historic box office metric used by industry, and in the case of many older films the box office gross we are familiar with today isn't known. Betty Logan ( talk) 08:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Editors should indicate their preference for version 1 or version 2 of the text here.
Last week Coretheapple removed poorly sourced puffery. Of the sites he removed one was a hobby site ( http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com) while another was a blog ( http://www.onstageblog.com/columns/2015/8/9/the-top-100-greatest-movie-musicals-of-all-time) and thus both failing to meet the criteria as reliable sources as outlined at WP:SPS, and one was a dead link ( http://www.ranthollywood.com). An anonymous editor is repeatedly restoring these links to promote a non-neutral point of view. To the IP's credit they have included a new link ( http://www.afi.com/Docs/100Years/musicals_ballot.pdf), but the problem is this link does not corroborate the claim. It is a ballot for the AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies, and the problem here is that it did not make the cut. I fully support Coretheapple's decision to remove this cruft because it was highly promotional and very poorly sourced. For claims of this nature we need sources to credible polls (along the lines of the AFI survey) to include claims of this nature. Betty Logan ( talk) 06:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
In regards to the latest edit at Hello, Dolly! (film) (by the now blocked sock) I don't actually have a problem with the MTV source. However I do have a problem with the opinion of a single publication being presented as a universal critical consensus, so I have stripped out the other non-reliable sources and moved the claim to the critical reception section which is where it belongs. Betty Logan ( talk) 20:59, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
it looks like it might be technicolour. I came here to learn about the film, why is this information absent? 80.189.191.157 ( talk) 14:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)