Talk:Singin' in the Rain/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What about Gene Kelly's funny sidekick, who plays the piano for him in all his silent films?

"A Clockwork Orange" soundtrack

Wendy Carlos did not sing Singin' in the Rain in A Clockwork Orange; she sang I Wanna Marry A Lighthouse Keeper, which was in the film's soundtrack, but Singin' in the Rain, which they played at the end credits, is in fact Gene Kelly's original version from the 1952 film.

Wendy Carlos & Singin' In the Rain

Wendy Carlos is not a singer, she is a composer. She performed all the synthesizer-based pieces featured in the film. You are correct that Gene Kelly's version appears during the end credits, but Wendy Carlos also performed an instrumental version of the song which is played during the film. -DGV

Question

Now, don't get me wrong -- I'm as big a Buggles fan as anybody else -- but is the connection to "Video Killed the Radio Star" really strong enough to merit a section? Robertissimo 10:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Character Pages

Quick question. I noticed that there are no distinct pages for the four lead cahracters, Don, Kathy, Lina, and Cosmo. Were there once pages for them, and then they were merged with the article proper? Or have three never been any pages for them? If the latter be the case, would it be appropriate to make pages for them? I would be more than happy to do it, but am not quite sure whether or not it would be a good thing. Ourai 00:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't think there were ever pages for the characters in this movie. However, it would be preferable to add more information to this page before trying to break the characters out into separate articles; see WP:FICT for guidelines. --Metropolitan90 07:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

"Voices" removed

The "Voices" section of the article was a compendium of rumor and innuendo, much of it obviously untrue to anybody who's spent any time at all watching and studying the film. Because of this, I've removed it entirely. Anyone who wishes to re-insert pieces of this supposed information should not do so without citing sources. unfutz 22:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you provide an example of what was untrue? The content matched IMDB trivia and my own listening impressions. Adam Mirowski 17:52, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
The IMDB trivia section is user-contributed and moderated only in the most superficial way -- anyone can post supposedly true "trivia" items there without fact-checking, so it is not an authoritative source. Also, the content of the removed section does *not* match my listening impression at all. If you want to restore the information, please provide an authoritative source. unfutz 02:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I am restating my question again: Could you provide an example of what was untrue in the voices section? Secondary question: what would you consider as an authoritative source here? Adam Mirowski 07:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe that what unfutz was trying to say was that the entire section was uncited (this alone would be grounds to remove it. Also, the claims made in the section (specifically those about who was singing for whom) seem to be false; I recently watched the film and the voice-swapping claimed in the section is clearly not true; the actors sing with their own voices, and they are not dubbed. As for a source, anything dating back to the original filming--say, director's commentary or something like that, perhaps press releases?--would certainly be allowed. IMDB, however, does not qualify, in and of itself, as an quthoritative source--the vast majority of its content is user-posted, giving it no more credibility than your own opinion (but of course, if the claims in the section are false, then you won't find any sources for it). Hope that cleared this up a bit. Ourai т с 13:36, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
While your contribution is interesting, I really want to hear Edfitz/unfutz clearly answer my question since he started this debate. Second: this article is almost totally unsourced, and could be deleted as a whole. However, it is obviously correct to me, together with the Voices section as it was. Finally, there are at least two quite reliable and pretty obvious sources of information which I would like to see other people to recall... (hint: I have both of them) Adam Mirowski 15:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm not interested in playing some kind of silly game. If you have sources for this information which are rleiable, restore the section and cite them. If you don't, then they have no place in an encyclopedia entry. unfutz 18:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

An editor reinserted the "voices" material, sourced from IMDB, and I once again removed it. The material in IMDB's trivia section is supplied by users and is virtually unmoderated (as you can tell by the number of entries which repeat material already posted in previous entries), so it cannot be taken as authoritative. For this material to be restored permanently, it should be sourced to something that can be considered to be authoritative, such as a reference book, a memoir or biography, or even something online attributed to a legitimate expert or a primary source. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) 05:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This info "Reynolds herself was dubbed in "Would You?" and "You are My Lucky Star" by Betty Noyes." has been removed 1-nov-2009. This source [1] has also a few other pieces of information that are talked about here. The movie could have been named "The history of dubbing in movies" so it is important. Samwonderer (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Debbie Reynold's bleeding feet

I removed the following: "Apparently Kelly required Reynolds to rehearse unceasingly until her feet bled" for several reasons. First, the source, http://www.pictureshowman.com/articles_films_singinginrain.cfm, is secondhand, and does not cite the primary source for the supposed information. Second, the source appears to be biased against Gene Kelly -- it speaks of Kelly's career going into a long slow spiral downwards after Singin' in the Rain, which is patently ridiculous. (Kelly did Brigadoon, Invitation to the Dance, It's Always Fair Weather, Inherit the Wind, Les Girls and numerous other good films and good roles after Singin' in the Rain.) Third, the material, if true, is not placed properly -- it is not part of the Fred Astaire story.

Before restoring this material, please provide a 'primary source citation for it. unfutz 05:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

And beyond that, the trope of dancing until one's feet bleeds is a little tired; it's not surprising, in rehearsing the kind of numbers common in old musicals (let alone in relation to ballet or other demanding technical forms), that minor injuries, blisters, etc., would bleed. One rarely hears about athletes being forced to practice until bloody-footed, yet one assumes, especially with long-distance runners, it must happen. Especially in the context of this film, in which in comparison to Kelly's and O'Connor's dancing, Reynolds's is fairly limited, the assertion seems out of place. Robertissimo 06:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Precisely! unfutz 07:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

The reference to Debbie Reynold's bleeding feet found at "The Picture Show Man" website (see above) comes from a 1998 interview with Debbie cited on page 217 of Alvin Yudkoff's biography "Gene Kelly: A Life of Dance and Dreams". During that interview Debbie Reynold's said, in part, "Gene Kelly made me work so hard that I'd almost pass out trying to keep up. He taught me how to work beyond all reason." Yudkoff's citation goes on to state that 'many afternoons her feet were bleeding but she would not be excused'. Gene Kelly's troubled career after the release of "Singin' in the Rain" is also comprehensively documented by Yudkoff, from Kelly's battles with MGM over the making of "Brigadoon" to the financial failure of "Inherit the Wind", after which Kelly was never called on for a serious movie role again. It would be a mistake to judge Kelly's movies after "Singin' in the Rain" with our 20-20 hindsight. They might seem delightful to us now, but they were critical and financial failures at the time they were released. By the way, it is not unusual for a dancer's feet to bleed from too much rehearsal. Both Ginger Rogers and Cyd Charisse, among other female dancers, have told similar stories. Pictureshowman 21:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever happened to the Rascal?

I distinctly recall in the movie that the "Cavalier" became the "Rascal" ("The Dancing Rascal," and "The Royal Rascal.") From whence these "Cavalier" references? Am I confused? Carlaclaws 01:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Alas, you are mistaken. The Royal Rascal was the film that premiered at the very beginning of SITR. (No! No! No! Yes! Yes! Yes!) Clarityfiend 06:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, The Royal Rascal was the film whose premiere provides the excuse for the extended introduction to SITR, but it was not the film in which the "No No No / Yes Yes Yes" sound confusion occured. That happened later in the story, at the sneak preview of the "100% All Talking" film The Dueling Cavalier (which was later saved by converting it to The Dancing Cavalier). The Royal Rascal was strcitly a silent film. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) 02:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
That was just a joke - an imagined conversation between Carlaclaws and me. I guess I was too cavalier with the wording and not fiendishly clear enough. Clarityfiend 05:04, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Paddington in the Rain!

I found a clip on YouTube of what appears to be an episode of Paddington, where he does his own recreation of Singin' in the Rain! Link to the YouTube video Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwtFYneCDyc

Could go in 'Movie & TV references to Singin' in the Rain', but I'm not sure if it's from a full episode of Paddington, or if it was made as some kind of special.

-- JaffaCakeLover 18:19, 28 January 2007 (GMT)

It was removed! Does anyone know if it's hosted elsewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.35.214 (talk) 04:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure about this? You may be confusing it with a parody of Singin' in the Rain done not by Paddington Bear, but The Wombles. PatGallacher (talk) 16:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Singing in the rain poster.jpg

Image:Singing in the rain poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Just a note to say that that someone has added a fair use rationale for this image. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 07:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The Three Musketeers

Does anyone have any information about the extended stunt scene in SITR which recreates (almost exactly, I think) a scene from The Three Musketeers? I've always thought that it was a pretty impressive feat for Kelly, given that six years seperated the two films. 78.144.120.131 (talk) 20:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced statements

I have removed the statements lacking sources to here until citations can be found. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

  • ("Make 'Em Laugh", considered an original song, but a near-plagiarism of Cole Porter's "Be a Clown") although it is said Porter gave his tacit permission.
  • O'Connor was hospitalized for a week for exhaustion after shooting this number. ("Make 'Em Laugh")
  • Donald O'Connor also apparently did not enjoy working with Kelly, finding him to be somewhat of a tyrant on the set, despite being quoted as saying that Kelly was "patient" with him.


I have a question, in the top of the article it said "Although it was a big hit when first released, it was not accorded its legendary status by contemporary critics." Ok, i'm spaniard and maybe don't understand it well, but i think it mean that some contemporay critic didn't like the film. and my question is, Who were them? it's possible to found (an reference) that critics? --83.46.158.212 (talk) 12:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

One take?

This statement is dubious: "Kelly managed to perform the entire song [Singin' in the Rain] in one take, thanks to cameras placed at predetermined locations". Each shot of that sequence would have to have been meticulously set up, as to lighting, falling water, etc... What a nightmare to try to do it in "one take". And what a silly idea to claim this! Cite a reliable reference or remove... DyadTriad (talk) 17:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

About this again, is there a source saying it took more than one take? Suddenly it says it took 2-3 days and IMDB says otherwise, and I trust them a lot more than a sudden edit to this article.-174.21.80.36 (talk) 10:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

references section

this page has a section called "references", however the section seems to be made up mostly of trvia facts, and have nothing to do with references. Givememoney17 (talk) 01:09, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Fact

During the filming of Singin' in the Rain, the director had two ladies Carol Haney and Gwen Verdon put on tap dancing shows and dance around in bucketsful of water. Apparently, he liked Gene Kelly's dancing, but wasn't able to get the sound he wanted for someone dancing in the rain. The sounds of Gene Kelly's tap dancing in the movie aren't really the sounds he made during the filming of the movie.Fact from Appzilla 2 EleoTager (talk) 12:30, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Lead

The lead section needs serious work as it fails to properly summarize the story. Viriditas (talk) 07:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

IMO, the single sentence is adequate, but I'll take a crack at it. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Hospitalization

Donald O'Connor had to be hospitalized after filming the "Make 'em Laugh" sequence. He smoked up to four packs of cigarettes a day.

Reading this from the year 2012, one always wonders what it means to be "hospitalized" during this time. So, they put him in a bed, and? What's the point of hospitalizing him? What they should have done, is get him to stop smoking, but in the 1950s, all the physicians smoked and thought it was wonderful. Viriditas (talk) 02:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Lighting the rain

In the commentary track on the DVD, Rudy Behlmer states "you have to make the holes, so you have puddles, and backlight the rain because, rain, if you shoot it straight on, it doesn't register so you have to backlight the rain so you can see the rain, and yet still light your subject and background so that it looks right...." On a personal note, I'm a theatrical lighting designer, and so I can attest that this sounds correct. The current citation for the lighting of the rain references Gene Kelly's widow, who wasn't even born when the film was made. On the other hand, I can't find any other online references to how the rain was lit, and I'm not sure how to cite DVD commentary (or if it's allowable here).

Disclaimer: On some other articles, I have been, and will be, a paid editor. That is not the case here. Just a film buff. Alexwillis (talk) 00:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Poster

Shouldn't there be a poster for the film in the movie box? --Matt723star (talk) 13:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Minor linking issue

I changed some linking the article's lede sentence from "musical comedy film" to "musical comedy film", as that's what seemingly the majority of film articles do (plus I personally prefer it). The edit was reverted by User:Beyond My Ken. Considering the contentious link in question is "comedy film", I feel that both words might as well be included in the blue text, seeing as having "comedy film" link to, well, "comedy film" just makes more sense than having "comedy" link to "comedy film". –Matthew - (talk) 00:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

The reason I reverted is simple: it is not a comedy film per se, it is a "musical comedy" film, but since musical comedy film redirects to musical film, the combination "[[musical film|musical]] [[comedy film|comedy]] film" gives the reader both links, without putting undue emphasis on "comedy film", which it is not. I say this having seen it again on the big screen just recently, and judging it purely as a comedy film, it just ain't all that funny, but as a "musical comedy film" it's got the right mix of humor, romance, singing and dancing.
To say that again in perhaps a more straight-forward fashion, Singin' in the Rain is not a "comedy film" with music, nor a "musical film" with comedy, it's a "musical comedy film", and that's what the original linking conveys, and yours does not. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I've also seen the film recently, and while I understand your point, it seems a bit like original research to give more weight to the musical genre compared to the comedy genre, especially since other film articles include "film" in the genre linking. Perhaps "comedic musical film" would be a more appropriate all-inclusive link and a compromise, but that too would be inconsistent. –Matthew - (talk) 00:39, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
No, it's not original research to say that an elm is a tree, an automobile is a mechanical device or that the sky is blue. If anaything, your version is slightly POV, since it makes "comedy film" the basic genre, while the status quo version gives "musical" and "comedy" equal weight. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:18, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
I suppose that makes sense; my apologies. But what do you say about the inconsistency issue? –Matthew - (talk) 01:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
"Musical comedy" is the generic WP:COMMONNAME, and I don't see any reason to stray from that. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:31, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

the dance

" His performance in the song "Singin' in the Rain" is now considered to be iconic." And yet neither here nor anywhere else on Wikipedia that i could find is the dance really discussed. I came here to find out about it. 5.34.85.72 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:48, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Someone (the source is disputed) once said "Writing about music is like dancing about architecture." The same kind of thing applies to writing about dance. It also tends to be very subjective, so one has the choice between describing what the dancer is doing, which is boring, describing what response it provokes in you (which is extremely subjective), and analyzing it, which is hard to do and mostly uninteresting to the vast majority of our readers.
Anyway, it seems to me that in your case you have two choices. (1) Look elsewhere or (2) Add information about the dance supported by citations from reliable sources. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:01, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Surprisingly (to me), I had to look hard before I found any that said it was iconic, but Time magazine did (the ref. is the one I added for Kelly's fever). There's also a Herald Sun article that's somewhat biased. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:05, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

The assertion that the water made his wool suit shrink is unreferenced. BBC Radio 4's The Film Programme did a special feature on the film, broadcast on 20 October 2019, in which Kelly's widow, Patricia Ward was asked about the rumour that the water made "his trousers" shrink, which she denied. I've added a citation needed tag. The documentary otherwise agreed with what is written here - it wasn't shot in one take, the rain was made visible by backlighting, not by adding milk, Kelly was suffering with a fever, etc. 87.75.117.183 (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Singin' in the Rain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Singin' in the Rain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

"In popular culture" entries

So, precisely what of interest do we learn from entries such as The song "Good Morning" was featured in the Legends of Tomorrow Season 3 episode "Phone Home" or The 2017 Eurovision entry of Italy, Occidentali's Karma, features the phrase "Communque vada panta rei, and Singing in the Rain".? I bet I can find dozens, if not hundreds, of uses of songs from that show all over the media, popular or otherwise; most of the songs were already standards by the time the movie used them. (It was something of a Brown/Freed jukebox musical.) What's special about those selected ones? What does it tell us about the musical "Singin' in the Rain"? Why does this article need to mention that one song from the movie ended up on the cutting room floor in a Pink Panther movie? It's possible that an argument could be made that these mentions could belong in the articles about the songs themselves. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 20:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

The entries tell us what they tell us, that Singin' in the Rain cuts a wide swath through popular culture worldwide and that, especially, the classic song and dance by Gene Kelly is widely imitated and referenced. If you have specific problems with specific entries, let's deal with them one by one and come to some consensus about each of them individually, so that their removal is not simply one person's decision. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:06, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Incidentally, "subtrivia" is not a word, so I've changed the header to make it clearer what we're referencing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:07, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
The list at IMDB is much, much longer, just to give an indication of what happens when something stops being a discriminating list. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 03:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, but we should copy all such entries to here, because they all tell us the movie cuts a wide swath through popular culture worldwide. Or we could just find a reliable source that tells us that the movie cuts such a wide swath rather than attempting to demonstrate it with a random list like the one here. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 14:18, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Again, if you would like to discuss specific, individual entries, I am more than happy to do so with you, and it's not at all unlikely that we can agree that some should be deleted. I am not prepared, however, to discuss deletions en masse, since doing so to IPC entries has been consistently rejected by the community. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:49, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Accolades

I made a good faith edit to make this article follow the WP:MOSFILM guidelines and use the recommended section heading Accolades. Guidelines which have been decided by consensus. Those guidelines do not suggest there are any reasons for exceptions.

This talk page does not indicate any kind of local consensus to not follow those guidelines. I think this change is being rejected because of a single editor doesn't like it. I don't think it is fair to claim applying the guidelines is edit warring.

I have asked WP:MOSFILM for comment. Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Film#Accolades -- 109.78.247.34 (talk) 15:27, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

MOSFILM is a guideline and is not mandatory or binding. "Accolades" is much too ambiguous (and pretentious) a word to be useful, whereas "Awards and honors" is straight-forward, easily understandable English, and has a very long history of use on Wikipedia. We should not be asking the reader to understand obscure words in order to use the encyclopedia. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Rules change on Wikipedia. Your length of time on Wikipedia or mine is irrelevant and that you would even invoke it is a false call to authority. If you've been around long enough you'll know people got upset about MOS:BOLD but in the long run people accepted it was better. You didn't' even bother to follow the basic polite rules and provide a meaningful edit summary, which is bad for someone who claims a long history of editing. Accussing someone of edit warring for trying to follow a guideline doesn't show much good faith. (Comment was on IP talk page, I have to spell that out because someone will probably claim again it didn't happen because they can't see it here or in the article edit history).
If the guidelines are worth anything then there should at the very least be a proper local consensus to go against the guidelines, and a note in the wiki markup to tell others not to waste their time trying to follow the guidelines. Neither of those things were evident here, and there wasn't a Talk page discussion either saying the guidelines didn't apply here. Please at least get some else to agree with you and properly mark the article so as not to waste the time of people making good faith efforts to follow reasonable guidelines. -- 109.78.247.34 (talk) 00:51, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Wikipeda's "rules" - in this case guidelines -- have also been intended to be descriptive and not prescriptive, although I suspect that many "MOS hardliners" deliberately overlook that and attempt to force things their way. As to "history", you should bone up a bit on your reading comprehension, because I said nothing about my editing history, I said that "Awards and honors" has been used for a long time in many articles, longer then I've been here, in fact, and "Accolades" is, by far, a relative newcomer. You're right that consensus can change, but it ought not to change to the detriment of the encyclopedia, which the change from "Awards and honors" to "Accolades" definitely is. Why don't we just go completely high-falutin' and use "Kudos"? (And, no, I don't want to get into the pedantic discussion about "kudos" being singular. It was a mass noun ancient Greek, but in English now, it's generally taken as the plural of "kudo", which was a back-formation, much as "peas" -- from the mass noun "pease" -- was.)
In any case, you and I have both made our viewpoints clear, I should think, so why don't we allow other editors to weigh in on which section title should be used in this article, "Awards and honors", which has been in the article since 2008 [1] (replacing "Acclaim") and which no other editor has ever complained about, or "Accolades", which you attempted to add a day or so ago. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:39, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
FWIW, I've rarely, if ever, seen "Accolades". "Awards and honors" is fairly common; I myself have titled sections that way on occasion. I must, however, confess that, despite my many years working on film articles, I haven't paid much attention to the later parts of MOS:FILM. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  1. ^ https://www.radiotimes.com/news/2016-12-25/is-the-rain-milk-is-that-debbie-reynolds-voice-gene-kellys-widow-busts-the-myths-about-singin-in-the-rain/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Singin%27_in_the_Rain/Archive_1&oldid=1185049750"