Talk:Oleanna (play)
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
No mention of the movie
[edit]I didn't know this was originally a play until I saw this article. -- 129.19.93.1 02:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Recent changes
[edit]Current state of article is a mess--I've reverted recent changes several times, but another contributor continues to add author's bio, numerous headings, and character analysis--the appearance is that of a term paper slowly being grafted onto the original article. What's there now is essentially two separate articles, one piggy-backing the other, without regard for WP:MOS or proper sourcing. I have attempted to discuss the editing on the user's talk page, to no avail. Appears to be, especially given the username, a WP:ownership issue. Help would surely be appreciated. JNW (talk) 22:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Needs Work
[edit]I can't contribute to this page but it is problematic. The second paragraph is pretty much lifted from reference [3] http://mamet.eserver.org/review/1994/Oleanna.html . I don't think it works to lift whole sentences intact, string them together, and append a reference to each one. --Gentlemath (talk) 14:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Point of View
[edit]I found the recent changes by an anonymous editor very interesting. I wrote the original plot summary. While intending to be completely neutral, I am a man and perhaps that is reflected in my description. I may inadvertently be more sympathetic to John (although I think most would agree that Carol is truly the less sympathetic character in the play—blame Mamet). The new changes seem to flip to a feminist perspective. It's often subtle, for example "Carol is even more forceful to name her instructor's flaws" becomes "Carol tries to educate him in his position of privilege and power, forcing him to recognize the fact that his desires and hatreds all center around obtaining and losing power over others." I may have inadvertently been non-neutral, but it appears to me that the new changes are not either. Can we get someone who is neither a man nor a woman to settle this? ;) Fnordware (talk) 20:16, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
- In that one example at least, the original sentence is definitely more neutral. Just change it back. 24.70.45.226 (talk) 07:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- OK, changes made. Hopefully this compromise between the two versions is more neutral than either of the originals. Fnordware (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2014 (UTC)