Talk:Romeo and Juliet/Archive 1

2675:

production of the stage version. Your arguments concerning reliable sources and original research are also somewhat flawed. In view of the "current" nature of HSM, there are no scholarly books to provide a source. In this case, WP policy is to use the most reliable sources available; and, that newspapers, art critics and other "notable" individuals can certainly provide a source. Your edit "the stars" is not correct, as it might imply to others that they are they only stars. In HSM there are 4 stars - the young lovers and their rivals. This is not original research, these are standard character definitions that every 10 year old now knows. (The newspapers are telling the adults!) Ditto with the references to "rival cliques". This is not original by any means, having been repeated on dozens of papers, news accounts, etc. You have also deleted "West Side Story", even though you yourself have seen it mentioned alongside "Grease" in article after article. To review the plot (not Original Research) two young lovers, representing rival cliques, fight against all odds, including peer pressure and family, to be together no matter what the consequences. In West Side Story we had the Sharks and the Jets; In HSM we have the Jocks and the Brainiacs; WSS - Tony and Maria, HSM - Troy and Gabriella; etc. etc.

2679:

reporter was relaying numerous facts that he gleaned from the author. He would have had his facts checked by his editor (and every reader). I have also supplied a link to a teaching manual that compares the themes of HSM and R&J. I have supplied links to numerous papers and arts critics that have made the same accessment. In view of this, please let this edit stand. If you want to post a RFC then do so or open a discussion at one of many WP venues. To keep deleting material that is completely backed up by the most reliable sources available in the present circumstance is simply not proper and raises issues of "page ownership". WP says that deleting should be a last resort, but you seem to jump there instead of looking for support amoung other editors instead of relying soley on your opinion that something should be deleted (an extreme measure). The rewrite you insist on is simply factually incorrect and is tantamount to deleting the original posting.

429:

feeling that this play is 'generally well known' is understandable, but for those who are new to Shakespeare (for whatever reason), the enjoyment should not be spoiled. Are we to assume also, therefore, that everyone knows other texts, just because it is assumed they are well known? The prologue offers just that - it does not say why they die, how, or for what reason - and thus, the story (akin to the more recent Baz Lurhman film 'Moulin Rouge') is not tainted but added to by knowing part of the plot. The emotions that are gained by the audience entering into the play with foreknowledge of the developments only serve to add to the receiving of the play, not hinder it. Crescent 01:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

3136:

gotta put our foot down. I haven't been too involved in this article due to a borderline interest- but I think I can put some extra effort in as your obviously willing to. I took a look at the standardization, and then I did a quick word count of the synopsis - and we're way over (130 words or so). If I have time I'll start reducing that now. The to do list should be expanded, and perhaps we should have people sign on to certain sections to avoid edit conflicts, and then we can all edit the updated piece. I also noticed we're missing two sections - and I can try to get work done on the critical reception - but not right away - maybe in an hour. --

1295:

the man to make the article, knowing as very little about the matter as I do. Is there someone who could make an article about the original story, and perhaps link to additional literature versions of this story? For instance, isn't the Romeo found in Dante's Inferno also based on the same folk lore character? That Romeo seems to be part of a story with no Juliet in it. Is this because they're two different figures, or is this because one of Shakespeare's liberties with the story was the character of Juliet? It seems unfortunate, to me, that any search for Romeo on the site brings us nothing but Alfa Romeos, Li'l Romeo and this play.

2182:

whole thing (it would take too much time), so you really should read the play again. Look into the lines and interpret, don't just look at the fance language and go, "aww, how cute!" Teenage relationships weren't built to last; not nowadays. Back then, they got married because their family and position in life called for it, not for love. They both seemed just a little starstruck at the sight of eachother...how is that love? Real love? That's just the physical, not real love...how would you feel if you saw someone you thought was hot, then decided to marry them 24 hours later?

2197:, and then they had to get married cause of paris. But whatever, I think we've gone beyond what talk pages are supposed to be (about the article) - and now we're to the point where your just trying to use the talk page as a forum to express your idea - I think it's fairly obvious that the majority (most importantly the majority in the citable world) agree that romeo and juliet is a romance - so I'm just gonna cut the conversation here, unless this does have something to do with the article that I'm unaware of. 694:

there is a comma before Romeo, which there's not. The assumption of the comma goes hand in hand with the wrong idea of what wherefore means. However, in Shakespeare's time, the meaning of wherefore would not have been mistaken, either by the actress playing Juliet, or the audience, and it would not have been spoken as if there were a comma there. The misunderstanding has come along some time later, presumably around the time that "wherefore" ceased being a commonly used word, whenever that was. Surely, th

31: 1833:"Romeo and Juliet" is set in Italy and not England. The statement also seems to confuse the reader into somehow thinking that Shakespeare came from a Catholic background or that he was somehow espousing Catholicism. In truth, the Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham was destroyed by Henry VIII in 1538, long before Shakespeare's birth. And even the time period for the play's setting cannot be definitively pinned down to the sixteenth century, regardless of geographical location. 2223:

because you are "cleverly" shooting down both mine and anybody else's questions/ideas on this talk page. I thought that Romeo and Juliet was a romantic play until I took a class that analyzed and broke it down; now, I know to think with a more open mind about Shakespeare. I also have another question; are the modern interpretations of Shakespeare very different from the plays, or are they quite similar with the exception of modern characters and language?

1845:

instead would be providing commentary on the people of the Catholic church. Consider Friar Lawrence's actions in achieving 'peace.' Using potions and playing God by delivering "death" to Juliet (through potions) seems a bit unconventional and perhaps a bit immoral for a priest. He understandably uses Catholicism in the play because it DOES take place in Italy - mostly Catholic at that time. That comment is misleading.

407:

that gives most pleasure is watching the drama, not being held in "suspense" (I mean, you probably won't ask subconsciously when seeing Romeo and Juliet, "are they going to die? Or are they not?"). I'm sure as literature students, a lot of us have probably studied a lot of Shakespearan texts and probably knew the ending even without reading it or seeing it before. And that didn't spoil the beauty, did it? ;-) --

369:

young to marry. It is correct that Juliet's mother says she was married at Juliet's age (and also that there's a hint that the nurse lost her virginity at 12). It's wrong, though, to assume Paris is a far older man: he may be so (and the fact that he can have man-to-man conversations with Capulet support that view); however the text is silent on the point and in performance he is often cast as a youth.

771:

and Juliet" which may be why Wikisource has the same thing in modern spelling. I think we may either need to incorporate what I've just said into the article, or leave the opening as it is. (My source was the Folger edition. The NPS edition modernises the spellings but then gives fuller quotations. I don't have the Arden or Cambridge R&J, though, which could be counted on to provide the detail.)

2993:

like some titles of Henry V include reference to "Agincourt" - again - that's just good marketing - not the real title. I think we should stick with the common titles and disregard the various longer "description" titles. As this effects numerous plays, perhaps we should continue this conversation there and develop a concensus. In the meantime, can we stick with the common titles, please?

3197: 2306:

is a common misconception and just not true. The first thing the parents hear about the relationship is when Romeo and Juliet are already dead. It's a tragic irony that the whole thing could have been prevented if both sides of the generation gap had been aware of what the other side was thinking (e.g. Capulet actually thinks Romeo is a good chap).

2742:

plot. The play-within-a-play plot is NEVER discussed outside of one charachter speech which mentions the "neofeminist" line.Trying to argue about plot with someone who has never read the script or scene the movie is truly silly. P.S. - the rest of this article is incredibly unsourced - your deletionism is amazing.

3290:

Wow, I'm having no luck on this. I had completely plotted out in my mind what I wanted to say - based on obvious information, but the problem is how to find a source for the information. I've searched "Romeo and Juliet Reaction" "Romeo and Juliet History" and "Romeo and Juliet Criticism" to no avail.

2455:

I'm not even sure if that's a play off R + J or not ... R+J isn't even mentioned on it's page, is there a reliable source that says it is? For now however, I'll take it off muscicals, because the fact is we just don't need it twice - nothing should be listed twice - however we could say (depending on

2192:

Not really sure how the argument is relavent - "oh wow! It's a tragedy and since plays are only allowed to be one genre it cannot have any romantic elements in it." Whaaaa? It seems like your arguing whether teenage relationships are romantic or not- but i'm arguing what shakespere meant. And as to,

2024:

I think that will has more definitions in English that do not match as well the meaning of the Latin word. AS with all translations it is inexact and open to interpretation I just though that wish was a better, more exact interpretation of it. I don't have any specific sources dealing with the name

1745:

I happened to be reading the article on Romeo and Juliet. It says "By doing so, however, Romeo inadvertently pulls Mercutio into Tybalt's rapier, fatally wounding him." As far as I can tell this is not part of the script of the play, though some play directors may include this. Just thought I'd point

770:

Well, the first quarto (a bad quarto) calls itself "An Excellent conceited Tragedie of Romeo and Iuliet". Q2, a good quarto and the usual source for modern editions, calls itself "The Most Excellent and lamentable Tragedie of Romeo and Iuliet". The Folio (reprinted from Q2) has "The Tragedie of Romeo

428:

Yes, I feel that the spoiler IS required. After all, if assumptions are made about the audience of an encyclopedia's previous background reading, then the project should only cater for those with an education that sees Shakespeare taught (and in particular, the play 'Romeo and Juliet') Certainly, the

3066:

This case is a little different- its the character list, which is a normal part of any play. The list of characters as part of this article is not essential to understanding a brief synopsis. But since a large number of the characters have their own articles, it really facilitates looking them up.

2915:

I'm sure there won't be an edit war. Discussion on talk pages will prevent that. The spoiler tags are particularly unnecessary when they are situated directly at the top of a clearly marked plot summary section. The plot summary obviously contains a summary of the plot, so it's pointless to labor

2305:

I also have a problem with "The play shows a system which imposes its beliefs on the individual, preventing him or her from reaching happiness and leaving death as the only escape". It makes it sound as though the feuding parents (or indeed anyone else) were actively opposing the relationship, which

2222:

I hate to add more here, but I'm trying to get an unbiased opinion, because it IS a misconception about this particular play. Haven't the scholars been looking into it? Are you one of them, or just some dude hired to answer these questions? The only reason why this may be going beyond the article is

2131:

That's your opinion, to which I respond with the above and also - it is just as likely love at first sight with two teenagers, and I think that the whole dialogue in the balcony scene could be considered wooing, or when they first meet. But I think Shakespear obviously intended for it to be romantic

2010:

I'm sorry, I've just reverted as possible vandalism or mistake a change in the meaning of Benvolio's name from "good will" to "good wish". However I've now noticed that the edit summary suggests you think "wish" is the better translation. I'm sure I've seen this translated as "good will" (and I know

1844:

I agree. However, Shakespeare did come from a "Catholic" background of sorts. Though the religion had been changed to the Church of England, it can be assumed that he was quite knowledgeable about Catholicism and its practices. If anything, though, Shakespeare would not be espousing Catholicism, but

1106:

Well, I can't stop you finding it tedious, if you do. It's definitely repetitive and I can't deny (having tried, at a workshop, dressed in drag) that it's difficult to act. It's definitely bawdy, though. "Dug" means nipple, "stone" in this context means testicle, and "fall backwards" means something

571:

out of thin air, did he now? Let me explain. Assume night arrives at 7pm and ends when dawn breaks at 4:30am. Since Juliet's scheduled to wake up at 4pm, at the very least she needs 3 more hours worth of the drug. And maybe up to 12.5 more hours worth. So, if Will was going to get it wrong, why

3062:

There are a lot of categories of article that benefit from the inclusion of Lists. In fact, a great number of encyclopedias of the printed and bound variety include them. In the case of an Artist, whatever their field, a list of works with the dates, linked to wiki articles on the individual works,

2896:

Meh, I would, but honestly, I could care less, I'm just trying to prevent some kind of edit war by now reverting the people who come along and delete it - I wasn't the first one to revert, and I figure, if the guy who reverted thinks it should be there - then bring it up on the talk before you just

1294:

It's my understanding that shakespeare's play comes from a very old italian folk story about a young man named Romeo. Shakespeare's story is largely different form the original tale as I understand it, but there is no reference to this original story anywhere on wikipedia. Unfortunately, I am not

995:

I really miss a section on the significance of the story of Romeo and Juliet. Why is this play so famous? Which message does it express that is so important that makes it probably the most well-known play in Western tradition? Something about how culture and tradition (symbolized by the families of

338:

Actually, Lady Capulet says that it is 'a fortnight and odd days' until Lammas (August 1st) and the Nurse says that Juliet shall be 14 'come Lammas Eve '. So while we can be pretty sure that her birthday is on July 31st (though there is some doubt due to the fact that the Nurse says she shall be 14

212:

This is not my field of expertise, but shouldn´t it be noted that the story ¨pyramus and thisbe¨ strongly influenced Romeo and Juliet? I point to the fact that the story was well-known and pre-dates R&J by, like, bunches of years. Also that the plots/characters/everything are very similar. I

3232:

I changed some things. One of the main things different now is that I commented out the prologue bit. The more I read it, the less it seemed like a part of the plot, though it should definitely go somewhere in the article. Anyway, the synopsis now weighs in at a sleek 676 words, though I'm sure

3135:

I think one of the big things that also needs to be worked on is reducing the article length. I mean I'm not anti-long articles by any mean - but when you have an Adaptations section that comprimises about half of a big subject like this, then you have a problem. I just think that at some point we

2630:

Ok - by that source - you just phrased it wrong, the guy said that the play they were auditioning for was a feminist version of Romeo and Juliet - and the critic compared the actual show to R+K and Grease, so in conclusion - we could say in the pop culture section (is there a pop culture section?)

2301:

I'm not very happy with the 'style and themes' section. Not only does it include speculative and therefore unverified claims, but some of them are also rather weak. Example: Elizabethan audiences wouldn't have thought it was a tragedy except for the Prologue. I disagree. Comic relief and bawdy are

2181:

Hae you even seen the title? The TRAGEDY of Romeo and Juliet. It wasn't meant to be a romance; it's about the tragedy of a "love" (infatuation) that can't happen, the fact that a teenage girl is forced into a marriage that she doesn't want to be in, then they kill themselves. I can't summarize the

2044:

Romeo and Juliet seems surprisingly unromantic to me, as I think it should with any other person who reads it. When Romeo goes to the masquerade, he is woebegone over Rosaline until he sees Juliet. It seems romantic, but in modern times, the meeting scene of Romeo and Juliet is translated to this:

1039:

Difficult question. The honest answer is that it's a work of fiction, and that it takes place in any era the director wants to set it in. The play was first published in 1597, so Shakespeare clearly had in mind an era around that time or earlier. The first known written story of the two lovers was

406:

Its not like there's anything to spoil. You're telling me that there's still a reader that would get the experience "spoiled" by knowing (the generally well known fact) that....*GASP*...THEY DIE?!! I don't think knowing the ending "spoils" anything, considering it IS Romeo and Juliet and the thing

3204:

I reduced the word count by about a hundred, while also fixing some strange content that could never be sourced, and some plain false content, but we are still 49 words over, however I'm hesitant to cut too much more without other's input - as now I am in a position where I must cut what I do not

2992:

The Folio table of contents lists it as: "Romeo and Juliet"; The Folio title page calls it "The Tragedie of Romeo and Julie"; The 2nd quarto calls it "The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedie of Romeo and Juliet". "The Most Excellent and Lamentable...." is an Elizabethean marketing tool. Just

2395:

As of now, the "Characters" section contains fairly detailed synopses of all of the characters. I would advise leaving all further explanations on the respective articles for the individual characters and shortening the ones here, for the sake of brevity. For example, the bullet-point for Tybalt

1829:

In the first paragraph of the Commentary section on this play, the statement is made that the opening sonnet "figures Romeo as a blushing pilgrim (palmer) praying before an image of the Virgin Mary, as many people in early-sixteenth-century England did at shrines such as the shrine of Our Lady of

1078:

The Arden edition (also based on the Second Quatro) has a long footnote on this and passionately (and convincingly, with a cross-reference to Twelfth Night) insists that it must be 'word'. Nevertheless, it is misleading for the article to state that the line is misquoted when it is, in fact, just

533:

Can anyone assist with the problem that I have come across to do with the friar's potion? He gives the potion to her Tuesday night + 42 hours (the length specified in text for drug to trake effect and wear off) makes it... Thursday 6 hours before Juliet retirs to bed on Tuesday (assuming this is

503:

The Paris-Juliet marriage is definitely reason, but the feuding families may also be a big reason for the secrecy. Juliet's line "My only love sprung from my only hate" suggests that a marriage between the 2 families would not have gone over well, and neither Montague nor Capulet seemed all that

495:

The real reason they couldn't marry openly is because of the intended Paris-Juliet marriage. It was common practice in the city-states of medieval Italy for the children of feuding factions to be married off to each other in the hopes that this would result in a cooling of the rivalry. If not for

368:

It is a common myth that girls were generally married as young as this in Shakespeare's time. It usually only happened with dynastic marriages, and even then the marriage was usually not consumated until the parties had reached 16. Even Capulet himself starts the play thinking his daughter is too

126:

2741:

Yes - and had you done your google search a little better you would have found this for yourself. BTW, the old source only talked aobut the "play they were trying out for?" I'm sorry, but for an editor, you really need to read. All the stuff about peer pressure, rivalry, etc. is about the movie

2652:

So in other words - the author of this play would have to say "Hey, I want to remake Romeo and Juliet, but in modern conditions". Your argument in close to exact words was "If you haven't seen the version, how can you edit the plot" - and the response is: it doesn't matter if I haven't seen the

2233:

I'm not hired by anyone - you didn't reply for a while, and I shut it down. And I'm not "cleverly" doing anything - I'm following the rules of Knowledge (think number two wrong with that sentence, you said "mine and anyone else's" - you're the only one to have said anything). But Knowledge talk

1986:

Andy - I am Soooooo sorry. I must have edited a previous version by mistake. Wow - my apologies, especially due to all the good work you did on what was a terrible page. I did delete the repetitive list of characters from the info box (which also made it long and unwieldy.) Also seperated the

1356:

OK, in the interests of being nice and helpful and whatnot - go to Google and search on "Romeo & Juliet Foreshadowing" and the top link should be what you're after. As a general rule, these talk pages are used for discussing the article they are attached to - so, talking about formatting and

897:

I agree with Tartan; we should make sure all the "allusions" are really allusions. Also, "allusions" sections seem to focus almost completely on those in popular culture, forsaking surely more common literary ones. However, I wonder about the need for an "Allusions" section in the first place. I

693:

had that mistaken view, which is why we're are pains on this page to point out the error of their ways. We've all seen the iconic image of Juliet on the balcony, palm flat above her eyes, searching despairingly into the distance for her beloved, and crying "wherefore art thou, Romeo?", assuming

2678:

I have supplied an in depth interview with the Author that reports the R&J spin-off fact. Your edit continues to be incorrect compared to the actual plot, as well as the context of the reference. That every fact supplied by the article is not in quotes does not matter. In this instance, the

2084:

I was just wondering if anyone felt the same way about that, because not only do they kiss twice within minutes of even laying eyes on one another, they are married less than 24 hours later and kill themselves for teenage infatuation before a month has passed. Is this really romantic, or just a

1055:

In the article, it says that "What's in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other word would smell as sweet" is often misquoted as "...by any other name would...". However, Wikiquote and Wikisource both say that it is the latter. I have only ever heard of that one. Maybe it depends on the

2674:

Now you are being unreasonable. First, your so there attitude does nothing to further this conversation. I do not speak as a simple viewer or layman. Because I am in the industry, I have seen and read far too many interviews, reviews, articles, etc. and have been intimately involved in the

324:

Juliet was two weeks from her fourteenth birthday (Nurse talks about her being two weeks from Lammas (Aug1) eve, Juliet's birthday - making Juliet 13 years and 50 weeks, and the date being two weeks before July 31, July 17th, when nurse makes this speech (the evening of the party/banquet)

1319:

Yes there is a fish the name escapes me he's a delicacy in Japan however he contains a poison used by shaman in fugi or fugu this simulates death and people are declared dead by doctors and can wake up in the hospital or at there funerals or wherever and they can be presevied as zombies.

339:'come Lammas Eve at night', which could indicate that she will turn 14 at midnight, which would be August 1st), the Capulet banquet cannot be on July 17th, due to the 'odd days' over a fortnight until Lammas and the fact that they were referring to the time until Lamas, not Lamas Eve. - 1904:

I have been teaching Romeo and Juliet for a LONG time and I have read the play so many times I have half of it memorized. This article needs almost a complete rewrite, there are SO many inaccurate facts, it's like half of the people who wrote this article haven't even read the play.

496:

Paris, a Montague-Capulet marriage would have been just the thing to put an end to hostilities. This would have been the case even if the two were not in love, since (as is now noted supra) the children's wishes were rarely taken into account. Sources: Asimov, Dorothy L. Sayers.

2525:

Two plays being simmilar isn't enough for an adaptations section. An adaptations section would require the writer to deliberately want to do a spin off of R+J. So reviewers saying "High School Musical is really simmilar to R+J", or in other words "connections", don't mean

2514:

I have re-sourced this to a teaching guide for students. Try reading the script, or easier, simply google "high school musical" and "romeo and juliet" and you will find dozens (if not hundreds) or references, interviews, and critical reviews that all make the connection.

364:

The only scandal as far as age went, in this period, was that Juilet was about to turn 14 and had not yet married. Her father was about to marry her off to Count Paris, a much older man, and her mother does in fact say that she herself was already wed by Juliet's

1976:

reverts this article waaay back (I noticed particularly because it undoes a lot of tidying which I did a few days ago). Was that intentional? If yes can you please explain? I've reverted to the preceding version. Can I suggest you build any changes onto that?

877:

I think the Allusions section should be renamed with a more acurate title. An allusion is an indirect reference, but a songs which are actually called "Romeo and Juliet" are hardly indirect. Perhaps it should be renamed 'Popular culture' or something similar?

2689: 1799:

It's an unsourced comment, and the name of the poison is NOT referenced in the play. Even if there is a good and thoughtful source, that source could only have been speculating what poison Shakespeare had in mind. It's better to remove it, which I've done.

127:

Paris, a Montague-Capulet marriage would have been just the thing to put an end to hostilities. This would have been the case even if the two were not in love, since the children's wishes were rarely taken into account. Sources: Asimov, Dorothy L. Sayers.

1357:

style and good English and arguing about obscure points of detail. There will be some sort of Shakespeare Discussion Forum about - I'm not aware of one but I'm sure they exist - where you can ask questions if your Googling doesn't come up with the goods.

2925:

There was a short edit war - with as many as 3 reverts, so I'm just saying, why don't we finish a talk discussion here before more people come in - honestly I could really care less what we do - again, I just don't want to see some stupid war over a few

3174:

Don't forget your citations guys! I know that we shouldn't put this in as a priority right now; the information itself is much more important at this stage. However, please cite your sources as you add things so that we won't have a huge burden in the

2701:

Alright - now you got it - althought hopefully you didn't use that google cache as the ref ... I'll go check. SEe? Was finding a source that hard!? (And by the way - your old source only talked about the play they were trying out for - I read through

627:

As I understand the play, the Friars messenger is actually stalled *before* he reaches Mantua, in a house that is itself under law of quarantine. Therefore there is no quarantine on the whole of Mantua, and no inconsistency in this part of the plot.

1064:

was included in many of the older editions of Shakespeare, and so became usual in the proverbial saying." All modern versions of the play are based on Q2, for the reason that Q1 is a "bad quarto", while Q3, F and later editions are derived from Q2.

2398:"Cousin of Juliet; angry and pugnacious. His nickname of "the Prince of Cats" may refer to the quarrelsome and vicious character of Tybalt the Cat in the fable cycle Reynard the Fox, which would have been well-known to Shakespeare's audience." 3423:

I honestly think this will be the trickiest part. May be best to leave it for last. We want to resist loss of information while eliminating lists and creating sourced prose. Separate list articles may be needed, with summaries in this one.

3084:

I only skimmed your comment - but I think what your saying is that the adaptations should be turned into list. Technically, we should avoid list - especially long list, because they are considered unencyclopedic (see most the links on

3407:

Actually, nevermind that. I think it's better to not have the information rather than having it with horrible sources. Unfortunately, my library is closed right now for construction, so I really can't get any good information until

623:

Quote (from the article) : "the Friar's messenger is unable to reach Romeo due to Mantua being under quarantine ...An interesting inconsistency in the story. How did the servant get back into Mantua if he saw Juliet's "funeral"?".

968:

Yes, they did. Because Olivia Hussey was 15, they had to get special permission for her to appear naked (event though her nudity only lasts for a split second). Leonard Whiting was a bit older, so there wasn't an issue with him. -

582:(slight pause for reflection.) Now back to the time-line. Mid-way is 7.75 hours longer, or 11:45 pm. Fifteen minutes to midnight. Enter Andy Warhol, stage left. He read Shakespeare, but he puts his own twist on it. Andy said, 857:

The Arden edition translates the title into modern English on its own title page, making the title 'The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet'. I will update the opening line of the article to reflect this. -

2970:- and I think given the ref, we should use that as the title. While Romeo and Juliet should be the page title- since the most common title is used as the page title, this title seems to be the correct one - simmilar to how 352:

It was not at all scandalous for Romeo to marry such a young girl. Juliet's mother chastizes her daughter, saying that girls younger than she are already mothers. Apparently, marriage at that age was a convention of the

1714:

That qualifies as the worst question ever for so many reasons.... but yes, there can be (and in this case there are) stories with multiple characters. - and for future reference the order of names isn't usually a factor.

2618: 1159:

section does spend rather a lot of time on the plot, but the other sections include the other desirable material. Improving the other sections (...especially the original research...) would be a good thing of course.

2302:

not unusual in a tragedy, but mentions and foreshadowing of death are already part of the lovers' vocabulary before Act III Scene i. It is quite obvious from early on that this is not going to be another Much Ado.

2334:

I strongly dispute including this. The two stories were almost ccertainly developed independently, with all of Europe and Asia between their places of origin, and I'm against including this in the article at all.

3073:

I think the list might be better at the end of the article. I think it needs only the essential info on each character. If you include a character analysis of Tybalt, you ought to analyse the others as well.

2157:

And as I recall - they got married because if they hadn't Juliet would have to marry Count Paris (was that his name? Sorry it's been a while since I read the play). Meaning your whole argument is irrevelant.

2752:

Ah, your correct- maybe I was refering to another source - here, however, the author just says that it's comparable - not that it's an adaptation - so perhaps we can take English over the summer together.

2456:

where you put it) "Is a made for television musical" or just not it's a musical in the television section. However if there isn't anything to back it up being a take-off of R+J, then it shouldn't be there.

2193:"how would you feel if you saw someone you thought was hot, then decided to marry them 24 hours later?"- for the last time(! seriously, how many times do i have to say this) your ignoring the concept of 2596: 1000:

the individual subjects (symbolized by the lovers themselves)? I know these questions often have many different answers, depending on who you ask, but there must some degree of consensus on some of it.

665:

or anybody else who wants to pipe in: What's the evidence that the popular misunderstanding of the word "wherefore" to mean "where" comes from this specific line of R&J? Hugh7 says "nobody thinks

303:

Juliet is 14, Romeo is 17, or so I believe. It could be interpreted that it was scandalous for them to marry so young, since one of the recurrent themes in the play is the foolishness of young love.

2620:. And naturally, the Disney folks don't hype up the R&J take-off thing that was immediately apparant to the critics. The last thing they want to do is scare off kids by mentioning Shakespeare! 3397:

I really can't find any good sources now, so I think I'll go on with sparknotes and the other "crappy" resources and we'll just have to keep improving on them to get to where we want to get to!--

2691:. Note: "Our story line is maybe not the most original or creative, but it's Shakespearean," said Borden, who described the plot as a modern version of Romeo and Juliet. "We took from the best." 3247:, for example, instead of a heading, so I wanted to make it look a bit nicer without having to take someone's work out before discussion on the talk. and I agree with the prologue edits too. -- 3070:

I come out in favour of the inclusion of lists. I think the non-inclusion of them on the grounds of style is pedantic and unnecessary, if the list serves to make the article more accessible.

2431:

It's probably just because there was a lot of vandalism - and if May 8th did have any significance - it would probably be blocked until after may 8th - since with significance comes vandalism.

1908:

my biggest complaint is that NOWHERE in the play does it state that Juliet is EXACTLY 13, and yet the article acts as if this is a well known fact. She could be as old as 16 for all we know.

643:

than was used in Shakespeare's time." This makes no sense--if the implication is that acting in the Renaissance was unnatural or mannered, that assumption is of course false. The link is to

2653:

version, because it has to have a source - so you just admitted to seeing the version and connecting it to Romeo and Juliet, which is original research - which is not allowed on wikipedia.

2136:

Romeo". By the way though - that whole breakdown of the plot was kinda ridiculous. Anyone could do that with any plot and get the same result - even if it was the most romantic thing ever.

753:

The problem, here, is the tendency for Quarto and Folio versions to have different titles from each other. The article title should always be what the play is known as today, however, so

3243:

Nice - yeah sorry about not taking those out myself, I didn't want to do anything too controversial, and the problem was before I added the divisions there were already fake division, "

3361:

Oh my bad - I was under the belief that it'd be nice to have better-quailty sources, but sparknotes I would think is reliable, I'm not too used to editting book articles. My mistake--

1194:

In the trivia section, it says that Romeo is a Capulet ("Juliet is asking the heavens why Romeo must be Romeo; that is, a Capulet and therefore her enemy.) That is not true, right? |

432:

So basically you're saying that he tells the plot so that the audience gather more emotions throughout the play? He doesn't exactly spoil the ending but he gives insight into it?

269:

Why are there references to the same radiohead and dire straits song in the musical AND the trivia section? and why is one of the radiohead references contradictory to the other?

1824: 2234:

pages aren't meant to answer your questions - go to a forum if your looking for that. Wikippedia talk pages are meant to improve the article itself - the subject is irrevelent.

2121:

It's not romance; it's two teenagers with a teenage infatuation. Romantic people are people who do cutesy things to woo eachother, not make out and get married 24 hours later.

1177:

as "better writing". (BTW, for an explanantion "in-universe" - one that I don't wholeheartedly endorse - see the link to "Manual of Style" in Smurrayinchester's post, above.)

743:- which I believe is the correct full title. I'm not suggesting that the article be renamed, just that the opening sentence display the full title in bold. Is this correct? — 315:

Juliet was 13, Romeo was...17 I think. And no, it was quite normal for marriages of that age (Juliet was going to marry Paris, rememeber - an event arranged by the parents)--

1280:

Personally, my favorites were the substitution of all of Act I with the word "POOP" and one desperate guy who wrote "CALL WILL KNIGHT AT 1847-331-1750" over and over again.

2796:

Your orgainization by dates makes the article look even more like a collection of lists. As you know, lists are frowned upon and it is encouraged to turn lists into prose.

1453:

OK, Romeo has a page now, but it's really, really lame. Someone needs to expand it drastically - give it a picture, etc. If you want a model, take a look at what I did to

3315:

I will do this. I have some sparknotes references ready at hand, and I can probably get some scholarly publications to get some information, too. I'll get to this ASAP.--

1839: 156:

describing in detail the various retellings of the story before Shakespeare got his hands on it. Should it be moved here, or is there somewhere else more appropriate? --

2338:

Even if it is included as a reference due to the stories' similarities, it should not belong under the Opera section, since it is NOT an adoptation of Romeo and Juliet.

528: 1849: 984: 2319:

I agree with your reasoning 100%. I've removed the "Themes and motifs" section, but without prejudice to someone restoring some of the ideas if they can be sourced.

1922: 103: 782:

I have the Arden edition (Second Series, the most recent available). It declares the second quarto to be the most authentic. The title page of the Q2 edition reads:

572:

choose this particular number? Well, our attention has certainly been drawn to 42, so maybe that's the point. This voice from 1603 (or whenever) is saying, like,

2350: 1243: 1016: 962: 933: 2649:

Your argument is originial research. The definition of adapt: to change something to suit different conditions or a different purpose, or be changed in this way.

949: 2011:

that Malvolio is always translated as "ill will" or similar) and I can probably seek out a source if that would help. Is there a source for the "wish" version?

1987:

picture form the info box - again it made the page looked strange - especially reducing the graphic to an unreadable size. If you see any problems, let me know!

491:

The young lovers decide to marry without informing their parents, because they would undoubtedly disallow it due to the ancient grudge between the two families.

184:

article that the characters' descriptions are quite large. I was wanting to know what people thought about doing this for Romeo and Juliet. I say this as the

122:

The young lovers decide to marry without informing their parents, because they would undoubtedly disallow it due to the ancient grudge between the two families.

943: 3003:

Ahh I gotcha - sorry wasn't sure about the title practices in Shakespeare's time. Hey though, chill out - I didn't add the title, I just remember seeing it.--

1447: 1289: 2224: 2183: 2122: 2086: 1489:

in class, one of the themes that we discussed was the idea that haste led to doom. For example Romeo and Juliet's haste to get married led to their demise.

955: 1499:

A) If you recall there was a reason it was so accelerated - Juliet would've married the other guy if they didn't marry quick - only a slight problem though.

2290: 1867: 1836: 1790: 1311: 1223: 1002: 973: 889: 272:

What is the significance of the date 29 January 1595 in the first paragraph? If it's the date the play first opened, then the article should state this. --

1557: 1412:

The Romeo page links back to this page. Because all of the other characters have their own pages, I think that Romeo should have his own separate page. --

455: 411: 3440: 3412: 3363: 3336: 3329: 3293: 3273: 3249: 3207: 3138: 3121:

s themes, motifs, and critical comment are essential to the article, but aren't included. In my opinion, we should get this done in order to get a class

3091: 3038: 3005: 2976: 2928: 2899: 2866: 2818: 2783: 2755: 2722: 2704: 2655: 2633: 2601: 2528: 2495: 2477: 2458: 2433: 2373: 2346: 2247: 2236: 2213: 2199: 2159: 2152: 2138: 2115: 2101: 1949: 1731: 1698: 1685: 1670: 1650: 1515: 1398: 1239: 418: 304: 3347: 3149: 1231:

Because It's time for the high school freshmen to be studying it in school. But you have to admit there have been some pretty funny acts of vandalism.

3304: 2939: 2920: 2858: 2733: 2666: 2506: 2488: 2173: 1606: 1572: 728: 421: 357: 307: 1083: 862: 1938: 1804: 1164: 1123: 923: 343: 1960: 609: 386: 373: 3401: 3319: 3102: 1846: 1816: 1734: 1673: 1518: 1401: 902:

surely one of the most alluded-to works of literature in the world? How could we even compile a somewhat-comprehensive list of all allusions to it?

761: 576: 567: 401: 329: 3310: 3049: 3016: 2829: 2766: 2715: 2644: 2539: 2313: 1586:

Thank you for joining in. Perhaps you could write it yourself? Yes. You could make the opening sentence "DUDE GAARA IS HOTT!!!!!!!", or something.

892: 3218: 3122: 2323: 1695: 1617: 1569: 1444: 1372: 1111: 598: 544: 396: 3189: 2033: 1461: 1434: 906: 3451: 3383: 3374: 3356: 3260: 2910: 2878: 2781:

fix that up (note: When I put the music in a section I also organized it all by date, which should probably be done for the other sections too)

1533: 1351: 1005: 2612: 2469: 1709: 1181: 284:

Is it actually a common view of the play that it was scandalous for Romeo to marry such a young girl? I thought they were both like 12 or 13.

3027: 1416: 1361: 1208: 1044: 1705:

Though of course it wouldn't have rhymed the other way round. FWIW, I don't think there is a single Main Character - it's Romeo AND Juliet.

1694:

but it also says at the end: "for there never was a story of more woe then of JULIET and her Romeo" so its hard to tell. What do you think?

1620: 1425: 523: 2227: 2186: 2125: 2089: 136: 3418: 1947:

Ouch... in actuality it's Romeo's age no one knows I believe. He could be from age 1-70 ... although he's probably closer from ages 11-19.

1889:

says that he should be played as around the same age as Juliet. In fact, it is rare for Juliet to be played by an actress as young as 13.

1314: 3284: 3237: 3227: 2746: 2695: 2683: 2624: 2519: 2296: 3179: 3129: 2806:

Really - since when did a chronological, categorized list become worse than a bunch of random information in a trivia section - see the

1493: 1069: 1040:

written by Masuccio Salernitano in Italian in 1476. (It appears to be a myth that it's based on true events in Verona.) Does that help?

1019: 1911:

Many other inaccuracies. I'm too stuck up to list them all here. but I hope somebody READS the play and then puts some work into this.

1761: 3428: 3078: 2400:

While this information is certainly valuable, it belongs instead on Tybalt's individual page. The actual bullet point could just say,

2280: 3114: 2493:

Actually - I'm now positive that it isn't a spin-off of R+J just by reading the plot, I'm going to remove it until you find a source.

1338: 1015:

I believe that I have sometimes seen Juliet's name spelled "Joliet". Does anyone have any information about this difference in name?

2413:

Well, I did it, just like I said. I assume that no one has any problems with it. IF that's the case, awesome. If not, talk to me. --

1375: 1324: 417:

Plus the Prologue comes right out and says it in the first fourteen lines of the play: "Two star-crossed lovers take their life..."

296: 3223:

I'll take a look at it. One thing I'll probably do is eliminate the Act division headings per the suggestion on the project page.

2417: 2408: 2000: 1981: 2840:

People are removing spoiler warnings on this and other Shakespeare pages. I refer discussion on the subject to the discussion on

2444: 2384: 469:"Romeo and Juliet is a famous play by William Shakespeare concerning the fate of two young star-crossed lovers. January 29, 1595." 107: 1991: 1914: 1793: 1749: 1407: 1149: 980:

Yeah, Leonard was 18 when he made the movie if I'm remembering correctly. My class didn't get that far in the movie apparently...

3266: 2450: 740: 718: 537:

Yet she wakes up in the night, moments after Romeo commits suicide - nighttime - because it is dawn when the families arrive...

3169: 1524: 651: 514: 508: 2427:

Why is the Romeo and Juliet page locked until May 8th? Does this date have any significance towards the story or Shakespeare?

477: 2777:

Per MOS guidelinse - I removed as much of the trivia section as possilbe - but I have to leave, so someone should be able to

1753: 1566:

Good point.....both of you......ya she needs a page of her own but if you feel strongly enough you should write one yourself.

1226: 747: 1926: 1033: 656: 1475: 990: 3352:

Well... if that's what it takes to get started, go ahead and use it, but the article will eventually need better sources.

2544:

And notice how the disney thing isn't on the grease page either ... because most of these sources say it's not just R+J...

2404:, or something along those lines. This way the page can be much neater and more concise. Does anyone have any thoughts? 1918: 1875: 1274: 99: 2015: 1284: 2987: 2354: 2208: 2168: 2147: 2110: 1725: 1664: 1644: 1509: 1480: 1392: 1247: 1298: 882: 3184: 2800: 1100: 1050: 594:

What a tough world we're making for ourselves. Think about it. (Thus endeth Jack's metaphysical rant of the month.

1815:

How did the poison kill Romeo immediately? It takes time for the poison to actually have a real effect on the body.

1198: 954:

Do they REALLY appear naked? Cause, we saw it in our school, and I think our teachers should know if that is true.--

3057: 1893: 2997: 1819: 2888: 2848: 2039: 2021: 1973: 1334:

I am in the 9th grade, and doing a paper on how romeo and juliet foreshadow their own deaths. could you help me?

1127: 79: 71: 66: 1440: 1329: 981: 393: 2286:

I agree. I've removed it, but without prejudice to someone putting it back if they can source the connection.

1306:

there any non-fictional substances which might be able to produce a death-like coma? The wikipedia article on

3108: 706:"It ultimately derives from the 1476 story of Mariotto and Gianozza by Masuccio Salernitano, in Il Novelino." 451:. Everybody knew Romeo and Juliet were going to die, and if they didn't, the Chorus tells us in the Prologue. 1740: 580:

again, sit up and take notice of it. And then maybe look with new eyes at this little passage from my play.

3291:

I'll start looking again a bit later - there's probably a gold mine out there that I'm just passing over.--

2309:

Anyway, could this whole section perhaps be taken out altogether? I don't see enough in it to justify it.--

1968: 2688:

Here you go - from the guy who pitched the story concept and served as executive producer, Bill Borden:

1634:

Is there no page on Romeo? I mean as of now if you search romeo it redirects you to Romeo and Juliet ...

2390: 1603: 1554: 757:

is right. Let me do a bit of research on the other point. If I find anything I'll post it here, today.

279: 38: 2276:

wiki page. (If the movie in question was the 1952 film, there is no claim on that wiki page as well.)

172: 1780:

This links to a disambiguation page, anybody know which one of these links is correct? I would guess

1757: 1126:, the article should concentrate on explaining and dicussing, rather simply repeating, the plot. See 1024: 1010: 482: 92:

ok so who went to go see the play romeo and juliet i mean what kind of people went to see his plays?

1885:

You're right about Juliet. There's no textual evidence as to the ago of Romeo. For what it's worth,

1768: 3165:

at the bottom of it. This is very kosher and is a good way to invite other editors to contribute.

3086: 2617:

Sorry - you didn't try hard enough. I have re-sourced once again to an interview with the author.

2422: 2329: 2277: 1382:

Haha - I think the kid has turned it in by now - notice the time stamp - it's been over two months.

3125:. I already have some information handy, but it's probably not enough to warrant a new section.-- 2367:

says that it draws comparisons to Romeo and Juliet, perhaps your better off taking it up on that

1871: 1466: 920: 378:

PS: the text is silent as to Romeo's age. The people above suggesting he is 17 are conjecturing.

228: 200: 87: 3445: 3368: 3341: 3298: 3278: 3254: 3212: 3143: 3096: 3043: 3010: 2981: 2965: 2933: 2917: 2904: 2871: 2823: 2788: 2760: 2727: 2709: 2660: 2638: 2606: 2533: 2500: 2482: 2463: 2438: 2378: 2241: 1954: 1722: 1661: 1641: 1506: 1389: 697: 634: 460: 250:

I noticed that Romeo's exile was not expanded on. Also, Lady Capulet's death wasn't mentioned.

3159: 2368: 2253: 1589: 1540: 1430:

I also agree. Wish I had time to do something about it. Any volunteers to make Romeo a page?

47: 17: 2342: 1863: 1235: 1079:

quoted from a different edition. Therefore, I've removed that sentence from the article. -

734: 711: 192: 95: 3434:

I would agree there - and just so everyone knows though - in order to improve class we do

2841: 2029:

uses the good wish trans I believe, ((unsourced and not by me)) so it could be either way.

8: 2194: 2096: 1137: 1117: 1080: 970: 859: 340: 2085:

tragedy among families with comedy of the nurse and the whole teenage immaturity issue?

1859:

Juliet was really 13 and two weeks away from her birthday, as for Romeo who was only 17

1787:

My first ever attempt at adding to Knowledge, so I hope I really can't kill anything :?

382:

says that Romeo should be played as not much older than Juliet, for what that is worth.

3409: 3398: 3326: 3316: 3176: 3126: 2720:

Oh boy - it's a full pragraph - I'm going to try and make it more like everything else.

1310:

mentions reports of poisoned victims, assumed to be dead, waking up at their funerals.

1217: 1056:

edition? Could somebody with access to several editions of the play please check this?

959: 872: 606: 618: 2475:

And by the way - the source there didn't count - that just said it was a bit like R+J

2005: 1899: 725: 715: 452: 408: 354: 293: 3063:

if such articles exist, seems to me to be an essential part of any such Biography.

2816:

template. However, I do think that overall the amount of info could eaily be reduced

2772: 2414: 2405: 2364: 1530: 1458: 1431: 1096:

Paragraph about the nurse. I'd regard her anecdote as tedious rather than bawdy.

754: 744: 714:, Salernitano died in 1475. Unless it was a posthumous release, something's wrong. 648: 392:

I was always told that Romeo was exactly 16 and that Juliet was about the turn 14.

316: 1830:

Walsingham." How is this statement really pertinent to understanding the play?

1222:

Why, pray tell, must an article on the best play ever be so cruelly vandalized? --

673:", which I think weakens his argument. I infer he's saying that if nobody thinks 3438:

have to do this - I just think it would look better, but feel free to disagree --

2835: 2810: 2650: 474: 285: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2320: 2310: 2287: 2012: 1997: 1978: 1935: 1890: 1801: 1335: 1271: 1189: 1178: 1108: 1097: 1091: 1066: 1041: 940: 919:

I changed the title to 'References in popular culture' which is more accurate.

758: 497: 487:

Back before this talk page was blanked I changed this sentence in the article-

383: 370: 257: 213:

would make the change myself but i wouldnt want to potentially mislead people.

140: 128: 3155:

One way to create a section in progress is to add what you can and then put a

2363:

First of all, remember to sign your post with four tildes (~~~~). Second, the

2022:

http://www.wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_unit/2696/?letter=V&spage=5

1256:

Yeah, absolutely hilarious. What were your favourites? Here are my top three:

615:

I don't think that there was any problem with this, so, just forget about it!

3075: 2951: 2261: 2030: 1886: 1490: 1413: 1281: 1195: 1174: 724:

Found the problem; Salernitano, according to the page I found, died in 1480.

595: 558: 541: 520: 505: 379: 326: 188:

article seems a bit small and could be better merged into the main article.

3024: 2994: 2797: 2743: 2692: 2680: 2621: 2516: 2265: 1988: 1854: 1706: 1422: 1358: 1348: 1321: 586:. Sounds almost cool. But what I think Shakespeare was really saying is, 2974:'s name is actually Aaron Burr Jr. - but the page title is without the jr. 1810: 1472: 1205: 1161: 879: 562: 273: 165: 157: 3089:

for more reasons). But then again - it depends on what your thinking of.

3023:

dude - I am chillin and smilin. (Sing it out: don't worry,...be happy!)

147: 113: 2971: 1030: 662: 644: 640: 639:

I removed the following from the write-up of the 1983 film: " and more

435:

Also, in the time period, most everybody knew the story Shakespeare's

3425: 3380: 3353: 3234: 3224: 3166: 2885: 2845: 903: 227:

which has the comc version of Pyramus & Thisbe. I say go for it.

1529:

She is an important character in the play and provides comic relief

2026: 1996:

No, that's fine. I think your subsequent changes are improvements.

1781: 1454: 1122:

This article reads like a plot summary of Romeo and Juliet. As per

997: 185: 1774: 254: 164:

In the absence of advice to the contrary, I've moved it here. --

1443:

04:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC) ^^^^^ yes Juliet has her own page

1060:

The NPS edition says "word". Its footnote says "the Q1 reading

181: 153: 207: 135:

I revised my own comment for clarity. This is not a breach of

2962:

The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet

2586:

hints of Grease, Bye Bye Birdie, Fame and Romeo and Juliet.

834:

Printed by the Thomas Creede, for Cuthbert Burby, and are to

264: 1307: 3113:

A standardized format for articles has been written up on

1290:

Original Story of Romeo and Juliet untouched on wikipedia?

2854:

hmm, it's a tough one - however it's noteworthy that the

939:

They wanted somebody else to do their homework for them.

3325:

Can anyone tell me if Sparknotes is a reliable source?--

1173:

Agree with Rewinn. Still shocked by these references to

245: 3205:

think should be cut, and thus controversy may arise. --

2631:

that in High School Musical students auditioned for J+R

1825:

Accuracy about Virgin Mary in Commentary: 23 March 2007

2884:

I would suggest posting this on the Hamlet talk page.

584:"In the future, everyone will have 15 minutes of fame" 2864:

page actually says don't put it in a plot section ...

822:

As it hath bene sundry times publiquely acted, by the

504:

intent on mending the problems between the families.

237: 534:around 10pm, she wakes two days later around 4pm). 3115:Knowledge:WikiProject Shakespeare#Standardization 2260:In the article, there is a claim that (I assume) 888:Or simply "References" or something like that? -- 2069:Juliet: Well, I guess I will to make you happy. 1934:Come Lammas Eve at night shall she be fourteen. 934:what are the character flaws of romeo and juliet 950:Romeo and Juliet: 1968 version w/ Olivia Hussey 3036:Lol, yeah... marajauna helps me out too! xD -- 2571:With tones of Grease and Romeo and Juliet,... 2063:Juliet: I don't to that type of thing, sorry. 519:In Verona mainly, but also partly in Mantua. 2595:Sources: Exactly what you said I should do - 1773:"he buys strong poison, sometimes held to be 553:don't think about it too much - its a story! 2956:I remember seeing this on the history page: 1686:Who Is the main character? Romeo or Juliet? 1029:What time perioud did this take place in? 588:"You will only have 15 minutes in which to 447:The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet 2132:since at the end there's the line "Juliet 1471:Something tells me it wasn't done in 666. 1439:Just wondering, does Juliet have a page? 657:O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo? 402:Is the spoiler warning really warranted? 2556:It’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ meets ‘Grease’ 2099:- romantic people consider it romantic. 1690:well its hard to tell.....it is called 837:be sold at his shop neare the Exchange. 14: 825:right Honourable the Lord Chamberlaine 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3233:there is more work to be done on it. 2066:Romeo: But I'll be sad if you don't! 1265:Romeo and Juliet was written in 1973. 557:I think Shakespeare was way ahead of 3271:I can start working on this soon. -- 2579: 2564: 2549: 2272:, but there is no such claim at the 958:01:24, 21 March 2006 (UTC) Sorry: -- 25: 2402:cousin of Juliet, nephew of Capulet 2297:Style and themes highly speculative 529:Problem with maths/time in the play 424:(Reediewes, but I'm not logged on.) 310:(Reediewes, but I'm not logged on.) 23: 1204:Good point. I fixed it. Cheers! 1130:for an example of better writing. 24: 3463: 2396:would not include the following: 2081:(Make out again, nurse walks in) 2075:Now I feel bad about doing that. 1616:how did you know that was me? lol 3311:Adding Themes and Motifs Section 3195: 2078:Romeo: Two wrongs make a right. 1654:- NM, this has been discussed... 1107:like "into a position for sex". 702:Regarding the 'Source' section: 242:tell me every thing about romeo 223:was written at the same time as 29: 3190:Reducing Word Count of Synopsis 1652:/ 04:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC) 1408:Should Romeo have his own page? 1128:Twelfth Night, or What You Will 813:Newly corrected, augmented, and 741:The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet 681:, then why would anybody think 565:on this one. He didn't choose 1525:Nurse should have her own page 1209:22:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC) 1199:21:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC) 1182:08:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC) 1165:22:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC) 1150:15:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC) 524:13:43, 12 September 2005 (UTC) 515:where was romeo and juliet set 509:15:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC) 292:Romeo is much older, IIRC. -- 173:Expand characters description? 13: 1: 2916:the point by repeating it. -- 1735:04:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC) 1710:15:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1699:06:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1674:04:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC) 1621:05:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1607:17:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1573:06:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1519:04:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC) 1448:05:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1417:02:36, 17 December 2006 (UTC) 1402:22:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC) 1376:06:16, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1362:15:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC) 1352:15:35, 15 December 2006 (UTC) 1275:09:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC) 1262:Cock, cock, cock, cock, COCK! 944:11:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC) 883:15:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC) 863:12:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC) 762:10:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC) 748:04:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC) 344:16:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC) 3419:Reducing Adaptations Section 2842:Talk:Hamlet#Spoiler warning? 2451:Disney's High School Musical 1558:19:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC) 1534:15:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC) 1494:01:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC) 1476:07:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC) 1435:14:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC) 1371:Ya i can.....wad do ya need? 1339:21:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC) 1315:18:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC) 991:Significance, interpretation 985:04:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC) 729:08:00, 4 February 2006 (UTC) 719:07:57, 4 February 2006 (UTC) 652:18:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC) 456:00:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC) 397:04:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC) 219:That's probably true, since 7: 1426:14:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC) 1325:14:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC) 1227:14:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1112:19:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC) 1101:17:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC) 739:Wikisource calls this play 545:12:17, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 330:12:12, 8 October 2005 (UTC) 108:00:18, 8 October 2002 (UTC) 10: 3468: 3334:I would assume so, yes. -- 3193: 2385:15:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 2324:07:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 2314:02:44, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 2291:17:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 2281:07:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 2214:02:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC) 2187:01:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC) 2174:02:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 2153:02:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 2126:01:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 2116:19:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 2090:18:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 2034:17:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 2016:09:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 2001:16:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1992:16:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1982:07:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1961:11:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1939:07:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1927:03:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 1850:16:08, 25 March 2007 (UTC) 1840:06:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC) 1481:Theme: Haste leads to doom 1462:06:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC) 1285:16:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC) 1020:02:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC) 1006:02:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC) 974:22:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC) 963:01:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC) 924:21:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC) 907:21:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC) 893:02:48, 17 April 2006 (UTC) 641:naturalistic line delivery 610:01:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC) 605:You maketh my head hurt.-- 599:12:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC) 574:"Next time you people see 319:13:21, July 11, 2005 (UTC) 276:02:46, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC) 3452:01:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3429:00:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3413:17:30, 18 June 2007 (UTC) 3402:16:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC) 3384:23:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC) 3375:22:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC) 3357:22:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC) 3348:22:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC) 3330:14:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC) 3320:16:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3305:02:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3285:22:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 3261:02:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3238:00:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3228:00:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3219:22:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 3180:01:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3170:00:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC) 3150:21:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 3130:21:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 1894:14:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC) 1805:14:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC) 1794:03:56, 8 March 2007 (UTC) 1762:00:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC) 1441:Princess Roxanne Aquaviva 1051:A rose by any other.....? 982:Princess Roxanne Aquaviva 465:the first sentence says: 394:Princess Roxanne Aquaviva 387:12:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC) 374:12:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC) 358:19:35, 20 July 2006 (UTC) 288:23:55, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC) 225:A Midsummer Night's Dream 195:11:12, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC) 191:What do people think? -- 160:04:28, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC) 131:22:29, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC) 3117:. Information regarding 3103:21:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC) 3079:12:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC) 3058:Lists- a general comment 3050:00:29, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 3028:00:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 3017:00:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC) 2998:23:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC) 2988:02:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC) 2940:04:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC) 2921:04:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC) 2911:00:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC) 2889:23:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2879:23:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2849:22:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2830:14:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2801:13:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2767:14:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2747:13:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2734:11:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2716:11:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2696:06:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2684:05:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC) 2667:15:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC) 2645:04:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC) 2625:03:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC) 2613:03:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC) 2540:03:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC) 2520:03:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC) 2507:16:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC) 2489:16:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC) 2470:16:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC) 2418:23:20, 4 June 2007 (UTC) 1820:04:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC) 1084:00:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC) 1070:20:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC) 231:14:14, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC) 203:13:15, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC) 143:22:45, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC) 3267:Addiding Crtics Section 2445:03:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC) 2409:03:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC) 2248:00:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC) 2228:00:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC) 2040:Was it really Romantic? 1299:Friar Laurence's potion 1270:Isn't vandalism great? 1045:11:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC) 1034:23:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC) 806:Tragedie, of Romeo and 478:02:03, 5 May 2005 (UTC) 422:14:16, 9 May 2005 (UTC) 412:22:17, 2 May 2005 (UTC) 308:14:16, 9 May 2005 (UTC) 297:22:11, 2 May 2005 (UTC) 260:22:51, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC) 168:06:55, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC) 152:There's a paragraph in 118:Changed this sentence- 2968: 2268:instead) was based on 2048:Romeo: O, woe is me! 1777:, from an Apothecary" 1539:So why not write one? 1330:Romeo and Juliet essay 803:cellent and lamentable 689:. The point is, they 619:Supposed Inconsistency 3109:major editing needed! 2958: 2365:Butterfly Lovers Page 2060:Kiss me, you're hot. 1917:comment was added by 1752:comment was added by 42:of past discussions. 18:Talk:Romeo and Juliet 2264:(which redirects to 2057:(Goes up to Juliet) 1969:Unexpected reversion 712:Masuccio Salernitano 647:, a disambig page. 2278:THE evil fluffyface 2195:love at first sight 2097:love at first sight 2051:(looks at Juliet) 1421:I agree he should-- 473:What is that date? 180:I have seen in the 2391:Characters section 1741:Mercutio's Death?? 921:The Singing Badger 540:Any ideas anyone? 280:Ages of principals 229:The Singing Badger 201:The Singing Badger 3450: 3373: 3346: 3303: 3283: 3259: 3217: 3148: 3119:Romeo and Juliet' 3101: 3048: 3015: 2986: 2938: 2909: 2876: 2828: 2793: 2765: 2732: 2714: 2665: 2643: 2611: 2593: 2592: 2578: 2577: 2563: 2562: 2538: 2505: 2487: 2468: 2443: 2383: 2359: 2345:comment added by 2246: 2207: 2167: 2146: 2109: 2054:Hey, who's that? 2025:Benvolio (though 1959: 1930: 1880: 1866:comment added by 1765: 1252: 1238:comment added by 1025:What time period? 1017:Conrad Devonshire 1011:Romeo and Joliet? 199:I say go for it! 110: 98:comment added by 85: 84: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3459: 3448: 3443: 3439: 3371: 3366: 3362: 3344: 3339: 3335: 3301: 3296: 3292: 3281: 3276: 3272: 3257: 3252: 3248: 3215: 3210: 3206: 3199: 3198: 3164: 3158: 3146: 3141: 3137: 3099: 3094: 3090: 3046: 3041: 3037: 3013: 3008: 3004: 2984: 2979: 2975: 2936: 2931: 2927: 2907: 2902: 2898: 2874: 2869: 2865: 2863: 2857: 2826: 2821: 2817: 2815: 2809: 2791: 2786: 2782: 2763: 2758: 2754: 2730: 2725: 2721: 2712: 2707: 2703: 2663: 2658: 2654: 2641: 2636: 2632: 2609: 2604: 2600: 2580: 2565: 2550: 2536: 2531: 2527: 2503: 2498: 2494: 2485: 2480: 2476: 2466: 2461: 2457: 2441: 2436: 2432: 2423:Editing Disabled 2381: 2376: 2372: 2358: 2339: 2330:Butterfly Lovers 2270:Romeo and Juliet 2244: 2239: 2235: 2211: 2205: 2204: 2198: 2171: 2165: 2164: 2158: 2150: 2144: 2143: 2137: 2113: 2107: 2106: 2100: 2072:(they make out) 1957: 1952: 1948: 1912: 1879: 1860: 1747: 1720: 1692:Romeo and Juliet 1659: 1639: 1599: 1596: 1593: 1550: 1547: 1544: 1504: 1487:Romeo and Juliet 1387: 1251: 1232: 1148: 1144: 1136: 900:Romeo and Juliet 755:Romeo and Juliet 439:Romeo and Juliet 255:Go for it, dude! 93: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3467: 3466: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3446: 3441: 3421: 3369: 3364: 3342: 3337: 3313: 3299: 3294: 3279: 3274: 3269: 3255: 3250: 3213: 3208: 3202: 3201: 3196: 3192: 3187: 3162: 3156: 3144: 3139: 3123:higher then "B" 3111: 3097: 3092: 3060: 3044: 3039: 3011: 3006: 2982: 2977: 2954: 2934: 2929: 2905: 2900: 2872: 2867: 2861: 2855: 2838: 2824: 2819: 2813: 2807: 2789: 2784: 2775: 2761: 2756: 2728: 2723: 2710: 2705: 2661: 2656: 2639: 2634: 2607: 2602: 2597:a google search 2534: 2529: 2501: 2496: 2483: 2478: 2464: 2459: 2453: 2439: 2434: 2425: 2393: 2379: 2374: 2340: 2332: 2299: 2258: 2242: 2237: 2209: 2202: 2200: 2169: 2162: 2160: 2148: 2141: 2139: 2111: 2104: 2102: 2082: 2073: 2058: 2052: 2042: 2008: 1971: 1955: 1950: 1913:—The preceding 1902: 1861: 1857: 1827: 1813: 1771: 1754:151.197.125.241 1748:—The preceding 1743: 1728: 1716: 1688: 1667: 1655: 1647: 1635: 1597: 1594: 1591: 1548: 1545: 1542: 1527: 1512: 1500: 1483: 1469: 1467:Second printing 1410: 1395: 1383: 1332: 1301: 1292: 1259:Jools is a noob 1233: 1220: 1192: 1146: 1138: 1131: 1124:Manual of Style 1120: 1094: 1053: 1027: 1013: 993: 952: 936: 875: 737: 700: 659: 637: 621: 531: 517: 485: 483:Secret marriage 463: 404: 282: 267: 248: 240: 210: 193:Master Of Ninja 175: 150: 148:Earlier stories 116: 114:Secret marriage 90: 88:Initial comment 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3465: 3455: 3454: 3420: 3417: 3416: 3415: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3312: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3268: 3265: 3264: 3263: 3194: 3191: 3188: 3186: 3185:Goals and Talk 3183: 3153: 3152: 3110: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3059: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3052: 3031: 3030: 3020: 3019: 2953: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2943: 2942: 2882: 2881: 2837: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2774: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2591: 2590: 2587: 2584: 2576: 2575: 2572: 2569: 2561: 2560: 2557: 2554: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2512: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2452: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2424: 2421: 2392: 2389: 2388: 2387: 2331: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2298: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2257: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2225:24.247.184.126 2217: 2216: 2184:24.247.184.126 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2123:24.247.184.126 2119: 2118: 2087:24.247.184.126 2080: 2071: 2056: 2050: 2041: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2007: 2004: 1970: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1942: 1941: 1901: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1856: 1853: 1826: 1823: 1812: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1770: 1769:Romeo's poison 1767: 1742: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1726: 1718:Daniel()Folsom 1712: 1687: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1665: 1657:Daniel()Folsom 1645: 1637:Daniel()Folsom 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1604:Message Me.... 1587: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1567: 1561: 1560: 1555:Message Me.... 1526: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1510: 1502:Daniel()Folsom 1482: 1479: 1468: 1465: 1409: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1393: 1385:Daniel()Folsom 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1331: 1328: 1300: 1297: 1291: 1288: 1278: 1277: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1263: 1260: 1219: 1216: 1214: 1212: 1211: 1191: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1168: 1167: 1155:Disagree. The 1119: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1093: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1081:Green Tentacle 1073: 1072: 1052: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1026: 1023: 1012: 1009: 992: 989: 988: 987: 977: 976: 971:Green Tentacle 956:71.225.142.197 951: 948: 947: 946: 935: 932: 931: 930: 929: 928: 927: 926: 912: 911: 910: 909: 874: 871: 870: 869: 868: 867: 866: 865: 860:Green Tentacle 850: 849: 848: 847: 846: 845: 844: 843: 838: 835: 832: 829: 826: 823: 820: 815: 810: 804: 801: 798: 788: 787: 786: 785: 784: 783: 775: 774: 773: 772: 765: 764: 736: 733: 732: 731: 708: 707: 699: 698:Accuracy issue 696: 658: 655: 636: 635:phrase removed 633: 620: 617: 613: 612: 602: 601: 549: 530: 527: 516: 513: 512: 511: 493: 492: 484: 481: 471: 470: 462: 461:first sentence 459: 426: 425: 403: 400: 390: 389: 376: 366: 361: 360: 349: 348: 347: 346: 341:Green Tentacle 333: 332: 321: 320: 312: 311: 300: 299: 281: 278: 266: 263: 262: 261: 247: 244: 239: 236: 235: 234: 233: 232: 209: 206: 205: 204: 174: 171: 170: 169: 149: 146: 145: 144: 124: 123: 115: 112: 89: 86: 83: 82: 77: 74: 69: 64: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3464: 3453: 3449: 3444: 3437: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3430: 3427: 3414: 3411: 3410:Romeo in love 3406: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3400: 3399:Romeo in love 3385: 3382: 3379:That's fine. 3378: 3377: 3376: 3372: 3367: 3360: 3359: 3358: 3355: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3345: 3340: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3328: 3327:Romeo in love 3324: 3323: 3322: 3321: 3318: 3317:Romeo in love 3306: 3302: 3297: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3282: 3277: 3262: 3258: 3253: 3246: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3239: 3236: 3230: 3229: 3226: 3221: 3220: 3216: 3211: 3182: 3181: 3178: 3177:Romeo in love 3172: 3171: 3168: 3161: 3151: 3147: 3142: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3128: 3127:Romeo in love 3124: 3120: 3116: 3104: 3100: 3095: 3088: 3087:this template 3083: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3077: 3071: 3068: 3064: 3051: 3047: 3042: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3029: 3026: 3022: 3021: 3018: 3014: 3009: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2999: 2996: 2990: 2989: 2985: 2980: 2973: 2967: 2966: 2964: 2963: 2957: 2941: 2937: 2932: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2919: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2908: 2903: 2897:take it off! 2895: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2887: 2880: 2875: 2870: 2860: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2847: 2843: 2831: 2827: 2822: 2812: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2799: 2794: 2792: 2787: 2780: 2768: 2764: 2759: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2745: 2735: 2731: 2726: 2719: 2718: 2717: 2713: 2708: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2694: 2690: 2686: 2685: 2682: 2676: 2668: 2664: 2659: 2651: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2642: 2637: 2629: 2628: 2627: 2626: 2623: 2619: 2615: 2614: 2610: 2605: 2598: 2588: 2585: 2582: 2581: 2573: 2570: 2567: 2566: 2558: 2555: 2552: 2551: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2537: 2532: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2518: 2508: 2504: 2499: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2486: 2481: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2467: 2462: 2446: 2442: 2437: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2420: 2419: 2416: 2411: 2410: 2407: 2403: 2399: 2386: 2382: 2377: 2370: 2366: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2356: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2336: 2325: 2322: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2312: 2307: 2303: 2292: 2289: 2285: 2284: 2283: 2282: 2279: 2275: 2274:Moulin Rouge! 2271: 2267: 2263: 2262:Moulin Rouge! 2256: 2255:Moulin Rouge! 2249: 2245: 2240: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2226: 2220: 2215: 2212: 2206: 2196: 2191: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2185: 2175: 2172: 2166: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2151: 2145: 2135: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2124: 2117: 2114: 2108: 2098: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2088: 2079: 2076: 2070: 2067: 2064: 2061: 2055: 2049: 2046: 2035: 2032: 2028: 2023: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2014: 2003: 2002: 1999: 1994: 1993: 1990: 1984: 1983: 1980: 1975: 1962: 1958: 1953: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1940: 1937: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1928: 1924: 1920: 1919:70.48.183.234 1916: 1909: 1906: 1895: 1892: 1888: 1887:Stanley Wells 1884: 1883: 1882: 1877: 1873: 1869: 1868:207.69.140.22 1865: 1852: 1851: 1848: 1842: 1841: 1838: 1837:69.76.187.202 1834: 1831: 1822: 1821: 1818: 1806: 1803: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1792: 1791:Hugothehermit 1788: 1785: 1783: 1778: 1776: 1766: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1736: 1732: 1729: 1723: 1719: 1713: 1711: 1708: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1700: 1697: 1693: 1675: 1671: 1668: 1662: 1658: 1653: 1651: 1648: 1642: 1638: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1622: 1619: 1608: 1605: 1601: 1600: 1588: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1574: 1571: 1568: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1562: 1559: 1556: 1552: 1551: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1532: 1520: 1516: 1513: 1507: 1503: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1492: 1488: 1485:When we read 1478: 1477: 1474: 1464: 1463: 1460: 1456: 1451: 1449: 1446: 1442: 1437: 1436: 1433: 1428: 1427: 1424: 1419: 1418: 1415: 1403: 1399: 1396: 1390: 1386: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1377: 1374: 1363: 1360: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1350: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1340: 1337: 1327: 1326: 1323: 1317: 1316: 1313: 1312:62.25.106.209 1309: 1305: 1296: 1287: 1286: 1283: 1276: 1273: 1269: 1264: 1261: 1258: 1257: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1249: 1245: 1241: 1237: 1229: 1228: 1225: 1224:74.129.222.94 1215: 1210: 1207: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1197: 1183: 1180: 1176: 1175:Twelfth Night 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1166: 1163: 1158: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1145: 1143: 1142: 1134: 1129: 1125: 1113: 1110: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1099: 1085: 1082: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1071: 1068: 1063: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1046: 1043: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1032: 1022: 1021: 1018: 1008: 1007: 1004: 1003:213.237.94.61 999: 986: 983: 979: 978: 975: 972: 967: 966: 965: 964: 961: 957: 945: 942: 938: 937: 925: 922: 918: 917: 916: 915: 914: 913: 908: 905: 901: 896: 895: 894: 891: 890:213.237.94.61 887: 886: 885: 884: 881: 864: 861: 856: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 842: 839: 836: 833: 830: 828:his Seruants. 827: 824: 821: 819: 816: 814: 811: 809: 805: 802: 799: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 791: 790: 789: 781: 780: 779: 778: 777: 776: 769: 768: 767: 766: 763: 760: 756: 752: 751: 750: 749: 746: 742: 730: 727: 723: 722: 721: 720: 717: 713: 710:According to 705: 704: 703: 695: 692: 688: 684: 680: 676: 672: 668: 664: 654: 653: 650: 646: 642: 632: 629: 625: 616: 611: 608: 604: 603: 600: 597: 593: 591: 585: 581: 579: 578: 570: 569: 564: 560: 559:Douglas Adams 556: 555: 554: 551: 547: 546: 543: 538: 535: 526: 525: 522: 510: 507: 502: 501: 500: 499: 490: 489: 488: 480: 479: 476: 468: 467: 466: 458: 457: 454: 450: 446: 443:is based on, 442: 438: 433: 430: 423: 420: 416: 415: 414: 413: 410: 399: 398: 395: 388: 385: 381: 380:Stanley Wells 377: 375: 372: 367: 363: 362: 359: 356: 351: 350: 345: 342: 337: 336: 335: 334: 331: 328: 323: 322: 318: 314: 313: 309: 306: 302: 301: 298: 295: 291: 290: 289: 287: 277: 275: 270: 259: 256: 253: 252: 251: 243: 230: 226: 222: 218: 217: 216: 215: 214: 202: 198: 197: 196: 194: 189: 187: 183: 178: 167: 163: 162: 161: 159: 155: 142: 138: 134: 133: 132: 130: 121: 120: 119: 111: 109: 105: 101: 100:12.81.126.107 97: 81: 78: 75: 73: 70: 68: 65: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3435: 3422: 3396: 3314: 3270: 3244: 3231: 3222: 3203: 3173: 3160:Section-stub 3154: 3118: 3112: 3072: 3069: 3065: 3061: 2991: 2969: 2961: 2960: 2959: 2955: 2918:Tony Sidaway 2883: 2839: 2795: 2778: 2776: 2740: 2687: 2677: 2673: 2616: 2594: 2526:adaptations. 2513: 2454: 2426: 2412: 2401: 2397: 2394: 2347:Rookierookie 2337: 2333: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2273: 2269: 2266:Moulin Rouge 2259: 2254: 2221: 2218: 2180: 2133: 2120: 2095:It's called 2083: 2077: 2074: 2068: 2065: 2062: 2059: 2053: 2047: 2043: 2009: 1995: 1985: 1972: 1910: 1907: 1903: 1858: 1843: 1835: 1832: 1828: 1814: 1789: 1786: 1779: 1772: 1744: 1717: 1691: 1689: 1656: 1636: 1633: 1615: 1590: 1541: 1528: 1501: 1486: 1484: 1470: 1452: 1438: 1429: 1420: 1411: 1384: 1370: 1333: 1318: 1303: 1302: 1293: 1279: 1240:70.110.96.83 1230: 1221: 1213: 1193: 1156: 1140: 1139: 1132: 1121: 1095: 1061: 1054: 1028: 1014: 996:the lovers) 994: 953: 899: 898:mean, isn't 876: 840: 817: 812: 807: 738: 735:Proper title 726:Deltabeignet 716:Deltabeignet 709: 701: 690: 686: 682: 678: 674: 670: 666: 660: 638: 630: 626: 622: 614: 589: 587: 583: 575: 573: 566: 552: 548: 539: 536: 532: 518: 494: 486: 472: 464: 453:Dachshund2k3 448: 444: 440: 436: 434: 431: 427: 419:69.51.77.162 409:Natalinasmpf 405: 391: 355:Smitty Mcgee 305:69.51.77.162 294:Natalinasmpf 283: 271: 268: 249: 241: 224: 220: 211: 190: 179: 176: 151: 125: 117: 94:— Preceding 91: 60: 43: 37: 2779:very easily 2415:BeastKing89 2406:BeastKing89 2341:—Preceding 1862:—Preceding 1531:Crazykid777 1459:BeastKing89 1432:Crazykid777 1234:—Preceding 1118:In universe 745:EatMyShortz 649:Chick Bowen 563:Andy Warhol 550:Metabolism 449:Italic text 445:Italic text 441:Italic text 437:Italic text 317:Joewithajay 36:This is an 2972:Aaron Burr 1746:that out. 1218:Vandalism! 1135:murrayinch 873:Allusions? 645:naturalism 475:Kingturtle 286:Bonus Onus 208:Influences 137:Wikiquette 3175:future.-- 2321:AndyJones 2311:Tanyushka 2288:AndyJones 2013:AndyJones 2006:Good will 1998:AndyJones 1979:AndyJones 1974:this edit 1936:AndyJones 1900:disgusted 1891:AndyJones 1847:Rscavuzzo 1817:JustN5:12 1802:AndyJones 1701:Chokeabo 1623:chokeabo 1592:Gardener 1543:Gardener 1457:'s page. 1450:chokeabo 1378:Chokeabo 1336:Rinnie204 1272:AndyJones 1179:AndyJones 1109:AndyJones 1098:Coriolise 1067:AndyJones 1042:AndyJones 998:alienates 941:AndyJones 759:AndyJones 683:wherefore 675:therefore 667:therefore 498:Ellsworth 384:AndyJones 371:AndyJones 265:radiohead 258:Ellsworth 141:Ellsworth 139:, is it? 129:Ellsworth 80:Archive 5 72:Archive 3 67:Archive 2 61:Archive 1 3200:Resolved 3076:Amandajm 2355:contribs 2343:unsigned 2031:Jvbishop 2027:Benvolio 1915:unsigned 1876:contribs 1864:unsigned 1782:Aconitum 1750:unsigned 1696:Chokeabo 1618:Chokeabo 1575:Chokeabo 1570:Chokeabo 1491:TehNomad 1455:Mercutio 1445:Chokeabo 1414:Must WIN 1373:Chokeabo 1282:PollyNim 1248:contribs 1236:unsigned 1196:Tgwizard 960:AimeeLee 818:amended: 800:MOST EX- 607:AimeeLee 596:JackofOz 542:Crescent 521:JackofOz 506:Pnkrockr 327:Crescent 186:Mercutio 96:unsigned 3408:then.-- 3025:Smatprt 2995:Smatprt 2859:Spoiler 2836:Spoiler 2798:Smatprt 2744:Smatprt 2693:Smatprt 2681:Smatprt 2622:Smatprt 2517:Smatprt 2134:and her 1989:Smatprt 1775:aconite 1707:Brickie 1423:Riraito 1359:Brickie 1349:Brickie 1322:Riraito 808:Iuliet. 590:achieve 246:Expand: 221:R&J 39:archive 3447:folsom 3442:daniel 3370:folsom 3365:daniel 3343:folsom 3338:daniel 3300:folsom 3295:daniel 3280:folsom 3275:daniel 3256:folsom 3251:daniel 3245:ACT II 3214:folsom 3209:daniel 3145:folsom 3140:daniel 3098:folsom 3093:daniel 3045:folsom 3040:daniel 3012:folsom 3007:daniel 2983:folsom 2978:daniel 2935:folsom 2930:daniel 2926:words. 2906:folsom 2901:daniel 2873:folsom 2868:daniel 2825:folsom 2820:daniel 2811:Trivia 2790:folsom 2785:daniel 2773:Trivia 2762:folsom 2757:daniel 2729:folsom 2724:daniel 2711:folsom 2706:daniel 2662:folsom 2657:daniel 2640:folsom 2635:daniel 2608:folsom 2603:daniel 2535:folsom 2530:daniel 2502:folsom 2497:daniel 2484:folsom 2479:daniel 2465:folsom 2460:daniel 2440:folsom 2435:daniel 2380:folsom 2375:daniel 2243:folsom 2238:daniel 2203:folsom 2201:daniel 2163:folsom 2161:daniel 2142:folsom 2140:daniel 2105:folsom 2103:daniel 1956:folsom 1951:daniel 1473:Brunbb 1206:rewinn 1190:Trivia 1162:rewinn 1092:Bawdy? 880:Tartan 831:LONDON 685:means 677:means 669:means 592:fame." 274:Mintie 182:Hamlet 166:Paul A 158:Paul A 154:Verona 2952:Title 1031:Akako 841:1599. 687:where 679:there 671:there 663:Hugh7 353:time. 238:romeo 16:< 3426:Wrad 3381:Wrad 3354:Wrad 3235:Wrad 3225:Wrad 3167:Wrad 2886:Wrad 2846:Wrad 2702:it). 2369:page 2351:talk 1923:talk 1872:talk 1855:Ages 1758:talk 1598:Geda 1549:Geda 1347:No. 1341:rin 1308:fugu 1244:talk 1157:plot 1147:ster 1062:name 904:TysK 691:have 631:hmm 561:and 365:age. 104:talk 3436:not 2219:|} 1811:??? 1730:/|\ 1724:/|\ 1669:/|\ 1663:/|\ 1649:/|\ 1643:/|\ 1595:of 1546:of 1514:/|\ 1508:/|\ 1397:/|\ 1391:/|\ 1304:Are 797:THE 661:To 177:Hi 3163:}} 3157:{{ 3074:-- 2877:] 2862:}} 2856:{{ 2844:. 2814:}} 2808:{{ 2589:” 2583:“ 2574:” 2568:“ 2559:” 2553:“ 2357:) 2353:• 1925:) 1881:. 1878:) 1874:• 1784:. 1760:) 1733:/ 1721:|\ 1672:/ 1660:|\ 1640:|\ 1602:| 1553:| 1517:/ 1505:|\ 1400:/ 1388:|\ 1320:-- 1250:) 1246:• 1001:-- 577:42 568:42 106:) 76:→ 2599:. 2371:. 2349:( 2210:© 2170:© 2149:© 2112:© 1929:. 1921:( 1870:( 1764:. 1756:( 1727:C 1666:C 1646:C 1511:C 1394:C 1242:( 1141:e 1133:s 102:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index