Talk:Kristin Chenoweth

Links

An IP has been attempting to change the orthography, altering the established spelling of internal links to WP articles, which is probably not a good idea. Our article is called Musical theatre and there is no obvious advantage in spelling it otherwise when linking to it, especially as even the most patriotic American must agree that both "theatre" and "theater" are current American spellings, as Merriam-Webster and other dictionaries of American English confirm. If the editor demurs we can discuss the matter here. Tim riley talk 18:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Tim riley. In fact, American theatre professionals (I was one) usually prefer the spelling "theatre". This was, long ago, discussed at length at the Musical theatre article and at the musical theatre project. In addition, the IP's extensive edit warring and failure to use the WP:BRD process is troubling. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:40, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

I've had a look at what's going on over the past day's group of edits, it still appears edit warring is definately still going on when I looked at the article editing history. About time this article should be protected if this sort of thing continues. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:41, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2021

Change “Chenoweth made her film debut in 2002” under the Film section of the Career tab to instead include information about her starring in Annie in 1999 with Victor Garber and Kathy Bates. Source: http://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Annie_(1999_film) LebaElleirbag45 (talk) 04:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Annie was a made-for-TV film. Her theatrical film debut was in 2002. I've clarified. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Lead changes

Hi! User talk:Ssilvers said I should come here with suggestions. I think there should be changes to the lead and body of the text so it should have some sense of flow and organization to it.

As a reader who wanted to look at her career the lead looked incredibly overstuffed. I think there's a way to condense it so it's easy to read. I personally think it would make more sense to have a section of theatre, mention her Broadway debut, Tony Award win and nominations, followed by notable Broadway roles. Then a section for her television roles, Emmy win and nomination, and for film roles. Also, it also doesn't make sense to list all 8 of her studio albums here.

As for the body of the article I would definitely suggest having dates to break up her career instead of just labeling "Theater", "Film", and "Television" repeating the sub headings already in her credits section. For me with the text as is, there doesn't seem to be a flow or progression.

Also why is there a separate article linked titled "Kristin Chenoweth credits" and then all the credits are repeated in the Kristin Chenoweth article? I think we should either do away with her credits on this page since it's redundant being in the separate article or at the very least remove the non-Broadway stage performances on this page since it's already listed in the "credits" page.

Here below is a condensed cleaner suggestion of what her lead could look like:

• • Kristin Dawn Chenoweth (/ˈtʃɛnoʊwɛθ/; born Kristi Dawn Chenoweth; July 24, 1968) is an American actress and singer, with credits in musical theatre, film, and television. Chenoweth sang gospel music as a child in Oklahoma and studied opera before deciding to pursue a career in musical theatre. She has earned numerous accolades including a Tony Award and a Primetime Emmy Award.

• • Chenoweth made her Broadway debut in the musical Steel Pier (1997). She won the Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Musical for her role as Sally Brown in You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown (1999). She was Tony-nominated for her roles in as Glinda in the musical Wicked (2004) and Lily Garland in On the Twentieth Century (2015). Her other Broadway roles included in The Apple Tree (2006), and Promises, Promises (2010).

• • She starred in her NBC sitcom Kristin (2001) before portraying Annabeth Schott in NBC's The West Wing (2004–2006) and Olive Snook on the ABC comedy drama Pushing Daisies (2007–2009), the later of which earned her a Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series. She also acted in shows such as Glee (2009–2014), Trial & Error (2018) and Schmigadoon! (2021–2023).

• • In films, she has played mostly character roles, such as in Bewitched (2005), The Pink Panther (2006), RV (2006), Four Christmases (2008), and You Again (2010). She has played roles in made-for-TV movies, such as Descendants (2015); and voiced roles in the films Rio 2 (2014) and The Peanuts Movie (2015) and the animated TV series Sit Down, Shut Up and BoJack Horseman. She hosted the 69th Tony Awards with Alan Cumming in 2015. Over her career Chenoweth had released eight studio albums and wrote a memoir, A Little Bit Wicked (2009).

The One I Left (talk) 13:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for initiating this Talk page discussion. Your suggestions are thoughful (and some might ultimately prove useful), but I believe that they are mostly based on your relative inexperience with the encyclopedia. I will try to respond to your suggestions in turn, but please note that I am basically impressed by your presentation, even though I do not agree with the bulk of the specifics. (1) Currently, the Lead is 3 reasonable-length paragraphs, which is not unusual or disproportionate to the length of the article. It is also organized in a typical fashion as follows: Paragraph 1: major achievements. Paragraph 2. Early training and theatre roles. Paragraph 3: Television, film and other major endeavors. So, let's start with the fact that it's not bad. As to your specific suggestions, see below. (2)The proliferation of headings every paragraph or two in some articles is a bane on Wikipedia's existence and are an example of dumbing down the encyclopedia. Our readers can be trusted to read through a heading of a screen or so that contains dates along the way without needing further subheadings. So I disagree with your proposal there. (3) I agree that we might be able to remove the Credits tables, if the text gives adequate discussion to her key credits, and leave those to the sub-article per WP:SUMMARY. We should cross-check the two to be sure that the subarticle is accurate and up to date. However, we most definitely should not remove WP:NOTEWORTHY non-Broadway stage credits from the main article. (4) Now, as to your suggestion for the Lead: (a) You've broken it into 4 stubby paragraphs instead of the 3 substantial ones. This is another example of dumbed-down writing. If you are suggesting adding bullets before each paragraph, please note that Wikipedia discourages bulleted lists, and they certainly do not belong in Lead sections. (b) You start off with the trivia about her name change as an infant. This is barely encyclopedic information, let alone lead-worthy. Also, her early gospel music experience as a child and education are important, but not important enough for a lead paragraph. They should go in the 2nd paragraph. Then you have paragraphs on theatre, one on live-action TV and one on films and other endeavors. You add in her one-off hosting gig at the Tony Awards, which is not particularly important to the career of a major actress. I think it is better as is. I am sure it could be improved, but I don't think these changes, as a whole, are an improvement. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for reading my suggestions. I will respond to each point

* (1) Oh I totally agree with the number of paragraphs, I just think they list credits that aren't entirely essential, feel overly wordy and are repetitive at times. Ex. Listed in the first paragraph is GCP and Trial and Error. I wouldn't described these as major first lead worthy credits. Also I think some theatre credits are mentioned multiple times in the lead.

* (2) I strongly disagree re: headings within the body of the paragraph. With an extensive history of stage and screen, it's worth breaking up for the sake of readability. It's silly to have repetitive heading names like "Television" and "Film" in both the "Career" and "Credits" section. Dates are useful especially at a glance.

* (3) If there is already a separate article devoted to her credits, her extensive credits should not be duplicated in the article. This makes sense to me. Especially her minor off-Broadway roles. I'm definitely not suggesting bullet points lmao I just added them here for readability sake.

* (4) Yeah I think you don't need overly wordy and repetitive phrasing. I think what I wrote is a clean easy to read crisp list of essentials that you need to know about the person. I think it's worth noting that she hosted the Tony Awards, as it is now it says "hosted several award shows" (??). This is inaccurate as far as I'm aware. I know she co-hosted the 2015 Tony Awards but Idk what "several award shows" means as it is not specifically cited or referenced.

*These changes as a whole to me, seem like a major improvement. I would sum the lead for Chenoweth as it is now, as being long-winded, repetitive, and inaccurate. [Added by The One I Left]

(1) I would be OK with moving GCB, T&E and Schmigadoon out of the 1st paragraph and into the 3rd. Cheno was the most important character in GCB -- it was her show. She also got a lot of attention in Schmigadoon, and was in the main cast of T&E, so I think they are Leadworthy, but I agree that they need not be in the 1st paragraph. (2) Again, we are going to remove the Credits section, so it will not be repetitive. I reject the "at-a-glance argument. This is an encyclopedia bio. We should not repeat ourselves -- let others weigh in. (3) Again, I said I agree with deleting the Credits section, once we have done what I specified above. I will not repeat myself, but I explained above what approach we should take, per WP:NOTEWORTHY. Broadway performances are not the only noteworthy performances for theatre actors. See WP:NOTEWORTHY and try to stop repeating yourself -- let others weigh in. We don't need bullet points here. Per WP:TALK, please keep your Talk page comments concise -- a sprawling Talk page is not helpful. I try to keep mine to one paragraph for conciseness (4) As I already said, I disagree. You didn't read the article carefully enough if you think she only hosted one awards show, as I just stopped counting at 3. I disagree with your other points, and I am pretty sure there is nothing inaccurate in the Lead -- like what? What do other editors think? -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

(1) Thank you this is exactly what I was suggesting.

(2) Yes agree credits need to be removed since there is a separate credit article

(3) I'm definitely not trying to repeat myself, I'm directly answering the questions you are posing. Also I don't need you to nitpick in how I respond. You definitely are writing these lengthy paragraphs and I'm writing concise bullet point responses. Thank you.

(4) They may be hidden in the article, but you need to be specific in which shows she has hosted. Also are they prominent or notable ceremonies? I definitely don't think you can say she's known for hosting award shows but if you have to include it in lead mention the 2015 Tony Awards only since that is a notable ceremony.

(5) Other editors do chime in please! The One I Left (talk) 14:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

User:Jasonbres and User:Flami72 have been the most active editors of this page after me. Do either of you have any opinions about the proposals either way? -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Ssilvers asked me to weigh in here. It seems that there is a consensus above to split credits off to a different article once that has been cross-checked, which seems like a reasonable solution. There also seems to be consensus for this change, although please revert if you disagree. I've also removed a little bit of repetition. I don't think it's necessary to specify in the lead which particular award shows she's hosted, particularly if there is a concern about wordiness, and I think a thematic structure for the article as a whole is a valid approach at current length, with the option to revisit if it expands significantly. (I'd also suggest you both focus on discussing the article content rather than each other). Nikkimaria (talk) 21:49, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Splitting off credits

Per the previous section's discussion, I have now gone through the theatre credits to make sure that they are mentioned in the text with refs. (I had to add some) and also contained in the sub-article, which they all were. Therefore, I have removed them. I still need to do the Film and TV credits. One problem with what we are doing, however, is that the refs are in Chenoweth's text, but not (mostly) in the credits tables, which someone copied into the sub-article, so the sub article does not have adequate referencing. I would appreciate if User:The One I Left or someone would copy them into the sub-article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Now done with film credits. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:19, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

And now also done with TV credits. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)