Talk:Lamplighters Music Theatre

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gilbert and Sullivan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gilbert and SullivanWikipedia:WikiProject Gilbert and SullivanTemplate:WikiProject Gilbert and SullivanGilbert and Sullivan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

It is requested that an image or photograph of Lamplighters Music Theatre be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in San Francisco may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Removing "semi-professional"

user:ssilvers asked why "semi-professional" was removed from the description of the Lamplighters. I can't speak for whoever removed it before, but to me, the term seems like a peacock word (as per WP:PEACOCK). Do they pay their actors? It doesn't say. (Almost all amateur theaters pay their instrumentalists, the question is whether they pay the actors.) In the arts, a "semi-professional" artist is someone who is paid for his or her work, but not enough to make a living at it. It's not clear to me what a "semi-professional theater" would be: A theater that pays all its performers, but not enough for them to live on? A theater that pays a couple of star performers a living wage and relies on unpaid amateurs for the rest of the cast? (Both arrangements are common.)

None of the links justify the term "semi-professional". It really looks to me like the term is used here just because an editor wants to set the group above "amateur" or "community" theater, but isn't able to actually call it "professional". It might rub them the wrong way to have "amateur" put in the opening sentence of the article, so I'd suggest just removing the adjective altogether--as I'm doing. Narsil (talk) 19:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A semi-professional theatre company is one where the actors are paid, but not at union rates, although I have also seen situations where some were paid and others not. My understanding is that Lamplighters does pay all the actors. I completely disagree with your conclusion. If it is community theatre, it should say so. However, this article says that the company is "a professional nonprofit theater company". The company's website says that some of the company's goals are to: 1. "Provide a showcase for talented performers, directors, designers, musicians, and technicians, assisting in the advancement of professional careers; and 2. Provide training and performance opportunities for professionals and semi-professionals. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding what the company's website says, it seems to me to be artfully ambiguous. You can "provide performance opportunities" for professionals without actually paying them, if the professionals let you get away with it. (In some cases, they might feel the exposure makes it worth their while.) And "assisting in the advancement of professional careers" says even less to the matter--a "professional career" begins with being an amateur, and the company may regard their role as being to help amateurs get the experience and exposure to make the jump to professional. As to the other article, since it's contrasting the company's current "professional" status with its previous "all-volunteer" origin, it may just be saying that the company pays its staff (directors, tech crew, etc.). I haven't worked with the company in a dozen years or so, but when I was there, they certainly didn't pay all the principal singers, let alone the chorus.

If "semi-professional" means "some people are paid some amount of money", then I suppose they're "semi-professional", and so is almost every other community theater in the US, in which case the term is just puffery. If it means something more than that, I'd need to see a reference that shows the Lamplighters qualify. Since the group itself doesn't identify as "amateur", "professional", or "semi-professional", I think the best solution is to simply leave the adjectives out and identify it as just "a theatrical company".

That said, I won't go back and revert the change. If someone else wants to, they may feel free; but I don't think "a community theater puffs itself on its Wikipedia page" is worth an edit war... Narsil (talk) 20:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: I support the removal of qualifying terms unless a reputable secondary source can be found to use "amateur" or "semi-professional". Or perhaps we could apply WP:COMMONSENSE and use a more generic term like "minor" (or similar) that doesnt evoke the nuances of the other terms? - Nbound (talk) 04:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't use the word "minor"--opera companies aren't generally described that way, I don't think, so that would sound like a judgment. The category it most closely fits into is "community opera company", but it doesn't describe itself that way. And like I said, "semi-professional" sounds like puffery to me. So I'd be happiest just removing the adjectives altogether. ...I already got reverted once for doing that, though. Would you like to do the honors? Narsil (talk) 18:08, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I already pointed out above that there are two sources supporting the characterization of the company as "semi-professional": First, this article says that the company is "a professional nonprofit theater company". The company's website says that some of the company's goals are to: 1. "Provide a showcase ... assisting in the advancement of professional careers; and 2. Provide training and performance opportunities for professionals and semi-professionals." So, the conclusion that the company is at least "semi-professional" is amply supported under virtually any definition of "semi-professional" that you could find. -- Ssilvers (talk)

The references cited by Ssilvers above look perfectly acceptable to me in establishing that the company is at least semi-professional if not professional. Jack1956 (talk) 19:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the references look solid enough to use here. I do not think "semi-professional" is a peacock word(s). It is widely used by many professions and is used correctly here when describing certain roles within the theatre. -- Cassianto ^Talk 22:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lamplighters Music Theatre. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 10:00, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]