Talk:Hadestown

Peer review December 2016

Your edits look great! You're writing is very clear and you have a lot of great information to add. Everything you add is very factual and neutral, so I don't think you'll have any hang ups with biases. Your sources are also really great, so props on that! The organization looks concise and clear, but I might add a picture if I were you. Like maybe a picture of the playbill in the box on the right if you can find one? The only other thing I can think of is adding some citations to the intro to show a source that explains the play is an adaptation and its running time - I'm sure one of your sources have that information already. I'm not sure if you're supposed to add citations in a synopsis since it's just a summary of the main text, but if you do, consider adding a citation there. Other than that, I think it looks great! Best of luck! Lilypad96 (talk) 05:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Following my closure of the WP:RM discussion at Talk:Hadestown_cast_recordings (which overlapped this proposal), I am closing this merge proposal as Not merged (non-admin closure) Iffy★Chat -- 01:03, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

---

I propose merging Hadestown (cast_recording) into Hadestown (musical). From what I can tell, the former's content is pretty much all incorporated into this article already, and what little isn't could easily be added with minimal difficulty. --Sparksbeth (talk) 20:28, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

• Support as suggested, the cast recordings article has very much similar information as the main article. - SanAnMan (talk) 17:02, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose, not unusual for a separate article relating to cast albums of musicals, and this lists in some details the original live album in addition to the original broadway cast recording. What I do note however is there is little in the way of naming conventions for articles such as this Category:Cast_recordingsMark E (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2019 (UTC
• Oppose: It makes sense to distinguish the production from the album, which has chart appearances, etc. that are important but which should not be here. —Shrinkydinks (talk) 08:52, 14 December 2019 (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.

Requested move 15 December 2019

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed, with the caveat that the concept album is moved to Hadestown (album). BD2412 T 03:55, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

• Hadestown (musical) → Hadestown
• Hadestown → Hadestown (concept album)

– Hadestown started out as a musical, and the musical has eclipsed the concept album in coverage and interest. Since December 2018, the musical page has gotten 1,823,080 views, vs. just 125,716 for the album.* The musical article has over twice the number of references, and searching for "Hadestown" on Google News returns a mountain of stories about the stage musical, not the album. WanderingWanda (talk) 04:43, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

* PageViews

• Support per nomination. The musical is indeed the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over Hadestown (concept album), to say nothing of Hadestown (cast recording). —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 00:31, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support. Hyperbolick (talk) 19:40, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support per nom/pageviews. Colin M (talk) 01:54, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Also, I'm equally supportive of Hadestown (concept album) or Gagaluv1's suggestion below of Hadestown (album). Colin M (talk) 17:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support per nom, however I do think it would make more sense for it to be changed to Hadestown (album)Gagaluv1 (talk) 02:53, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
  • No objection. I went with the more precise but less concise "concept album" to distinguish it from the cast albums, but I see that the Jesus Christ Superstar concept album is titled Jesus Christ Superstar (album), even though we also have articles for JCST cast recordings (1, 2). WanderingWanda (talk) 15:25, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
    • Yeah, plus any confusion can be avoided with a "not to be confused with" note at the top of the page.Gagaluv1 (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
    • Hadestown (cast recording) is currently badly titled IMO, since the article is currently describing two different albums. It should either be moved to a descriptive title like Cast recordings of Hadestown or split into two articles: Hadestown: The Myth. The Musical., and Hadestown (Original Broadway Cast Recording). Colin M (talk) 17:40, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Would support Hadestown (cast recording) → separate articles for Hadestown (2017 cast album) and Hadestown (2019 cast album). Alternative disambiguation examples are listed under Category:Cast recordings. Oppose Hadestown (concept album) → Hadestown (album) as incomplete disambiguation since Hadestown (2017 cast album) and Hadestown (2019 cast album) are also Hadestown albums. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 07:07, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly but I'm a mergist at heart so I'd go with one article. I'd name it Hadestown cast recordings. Note that this is slightly more concise than Cast recordings of Hadestown. As for "cast albums" vs. "cast recordings": Cast recording is the phrase used in the aforementioned article and on the Hadestown cast albums themselves. WanderingWanda (talk) 18:37, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

• Support Hadestown (musical) → Hadestown, as well as Hadestown → Hadestown (album). At the present time, there is no need to further disambiguate the album article per WP:PRECISE since there is no other existing article to disambiguate it against (Hadestown (2017 cast album) and Hadestown (2019 cast album) do not exist, etc.). When/if that day comes, this can be revisited. Steel1943 (talk) 18:02, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Hadestown (2017 cast album) and Hadestown (2019 cast album) are the proposed separate main title headers for the two albums detailed and combined under main header Hadestown (cast recording) which does exist and is an album, or rather two albums, therefore a move of Hadestown → Hadestown (album) would indeed represent incomplete disambiguation. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:31, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

New move discussion

Over at Talk:Hadestown (cast recording). Thanks, WanderingWanda (talk) 00:06, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Are other productions that aren't a Broadway, West End or US/UK Tour ever notable to be added to infobox, or should they all be removed?

Ssilvers has been removing non-Broadway, West End or US/UK tour productions from musical infoboxes, see here and here, stating that only Broadway, West End and US or UK tour revivals are notable. This contradicts the usage instructions from infobox, and if this is the case multiple musicals' articles will need to have multiple production locations removed from infobox. Whilst Broadway, West End and US/UK tour productions are listed as usually automatically notable in the infobox, I don't believe it is meant to be limited to that or that it means all other productions automatically non-notable for infobox inclusion, such as in this case with the Edmonton pre-Broadway tryout production or Australian tour, and other locations which are notable should only be removed from infoboxes of longer-running shows where infobox is getting too long due to space limitations. Happily888 (talk) 01:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Some shows have had hundreds or thousands of professional productions. Popular shows like West Side Story, Oklahoma!, Les Miserables and Hair, not to mention Hamlet, Twelfth Night, Death of a Salesman, etc. have had repeated productions in nearly every large musical theatre market throughout the world. There are dozens of theatre markets more important than Edmonton's including Broadway, West End, off-Broadway, Off West End, Toronto, Tokyo, Chicago, Paris, Manchester, Athens, Sydney, Melbourne, Milan, Edinburgh, Bejing, Madrid, Vienna, and numerous others. Listing all the productions of a popular show in larger markets all the way down to Edmonton, would make the infoboxes pages and pages long. It is customary in the Wikipedia articles about musical theatre to list in the infobox only the original production, plus "major market revivals" on Broadway, in the West End and any long-running UK or US national tours. Other major productions with substantial runs and starry casts, or which are for some reason otherwise particularly noteworthy, should be described in the full-blown Productions section of the article, giving narrative information about their encyclopedically noteworthy aspects, per WP:DUE, WP:BALASP and our other content policies and guidelines. The infobox template that Happily888 is citing was designed by members of the WP:MUSICAL project in 2006, and I doubt the instructions have been much updated since then. Hadestown is a popular musical, and it will have more and more productions as the years and decades go by. To keep the length of the infobox manageable, it is sensible to follow our usual custom of limiting the list of productions in the infobox to the "major-market" productions that I have described above. Infobox template instructions are not WP policies. They are just advisory and, as we have seen, often outdated. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

If you believe that the usage instructions in infobox are outdated, you should start an RfC to change usage in infobox rather than choosing arbitrarily the line of just only including Broadway, West End and US/UK tours only. I would of course agree than there are many cities with larger theatre markets than Edmonton, that generally shouldn't be included in infoboxes, in this case as Edmonton was an early tryout which significantly shaped the show pre-Broadway and prior to its Broadway premiere it should be included. I think if you're going to be removing all cities from infoboxes that aren't Broadway, West End or US/UK tours, there should be an RfC to confirm that's where the line is for being considered notable first. Happily888 (talk) 11:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

• Agree with keeping the boxes manageable by limiting to major markets only. Some boxes would end up many times longer than the pages (or even the scripts of their plays!) if we try to include every production. IB instructions are not holy writ that must be slavishly followed to the letter, but flexible guidelines that need to be considered with common sense, and sticking to the major markets (with some leeway if there is there is a tour that is particularly notable) seems sensible. - SchroCat (talk) 05:11, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Agree that we should be limiting to notable major markets but I don't think major markets should only be limited to Broadway, West End and US/UK tours only, and I think a RfC discussion needs to occur to change the template infobox instructions to confirm it if that is what we want to be the case. I agree that infoboxes shouldn't be excessively long, although in this case it isn't and other notable productions can and I feel should still be added that aren't Broadway, West End or US/UK tours when a production isn't that long-running yet. Happily888 (talk) 11:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)