Talk:Acting
Latest comment: 7 years ago by DionysosProteus in topic Woefully limited and perhaps outdated
| Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Acting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article uses the following optional standards for Style elements.
Please help us maintain consistency in the article by following these standards:
Please do not change these settings unless consensus has been reached. |
 | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Professional Actor & Training/System
The info under the Professional Actor was about training/system/courses. It's better under a heading that says something like that. I decided to Be Bold and change it. That leaves the Professional Actor heading, which I haven't taken out yet. I added a definition, along with the existing line about not all being trained and added an example (Bob Hoskins). (I believe he could be well known some other placed than England, as I believe he may have done a couple of films, as well as the TV we all know him for!!!!) Dannman (talk) 11:31, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Woefully limited and perhaps outdated
This article seems to conceive the subject as limited to conventional Western illusionistic speaking theatre. No epic theatre, no Asian theatre traditions ... The section on "Semiotics of Acting" is either fluff or BS; it's best to throw it out completely until the structure of this article somehow does justice to the broad field of theatre aesthetics. Wegesrand (talk) 10:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has been accused of having a systemic bias. Frequently, the articles are written from a modern, Western viewpoint, as this reflects the background of the majority of its editors. Google Books might be a good place to search for sources to expand the article. Beyond that, I'm not exactly sure what to suggest, as I'm not overly well-informed on the topic. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- In addition to the Western bias, I suspect a certain amount of pop-culture bias is at work here too. Wegesrand (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
- It's a mess from start to end. I've trimmed away some of the most obviously incorrect material, but it all needs substantial work. • DP • {huh?} 17:14, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
- In addition to the Western bias, I suspect a certain amount of pop-culture bias is at work here too. Wegesrand (talk) 14:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)