Talk:Works based on Faust

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

Removed items[edit]

The following items I removed from the list, because their connection to Faust (and/or their existence) is not explained anywhere on Wikipedia. I'm doing this for the purposes of verifiability: these references have to be checked as to their reliability. It's probably best that this article not get into the connection each work has with Faust, as this is a list. But, if notable, the information should go somewhere: perhaps articles should be created on each work where they don't exist, and those articles can describe the connection with Faust. The important thing is that we should not be doing original research on this page by describing works as retellings of Faust unless we can explain that. Mangojuicetalk 18:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drama[edit]

Opera[edit]

Classical music[edit]

Poetry[edit]

(note: I think maybe we should avoid poems: poets generally write a great many poems, and unless an individual poem is worth commenting on somewhere, it's not worth including here)

That is a ridiculous opinion you are in effect censoring future contributions to the Faust corpus with that idea you mose well just have Marlows and Goethes versions and nothing else -both Poets wrote a great many poems I bet you would not bar them from being added. So I am adding C Deans version as it is an original and valid version of the Faust legend. To say it has no worth is not your call as that can only be a subjective and value laded view

C Dean's The Tragical Life of Faust(2008) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xzungg (talk • contribs)

While I agree that avoid poems is rather ridiculous, the criteria for inclusion here is different: notability. See WP:NOTE. I've removed your addition (and a couple other poems) from the article. I would suggest if it (or its author) is notable according to WP:NOTE, then an article be created and then the entry recreated. (John User:Jwy talk) 05:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since the objection to merging Works based on Faust and Faust was that the resulting aritcle would be too large, it is a bad idea to exclude poems from the former: if the latter is to be exclusive the former should be inclusive.
And the fact that many poets produce a great many poems, some of which may be very short, is irrelevant (quantity is not to confused with quality.) Heinrich Heine's "Der Doktor Faust" is an example of a poem that most definitely should be included; decisions to exclude individual poems or poets would need to be made by an expert — and not merely an expert in poetry-at-large but an expert in the poetry of a particular language or era. — Robert Greer (talk) 01:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with you most of the way here. Heine is notable, so I have no trouble with his Faust poem here. For me, length of the work is not an issue either. Oddly, not even quality is an issue. Its notability. If I were to write a Faust poem, its highly unlikely it would ever be notable enough to appear here. But if, for example, someone made a famously disastrous movie version that was crap, but became an icon of movie disasters, I would probably list it here. I'm just trying to provide a reasonably clear guideline of what makes sense to me. A redlink about a brand new poem that isn't notable enough to have an article (for author or poem) just doesn't make much sense to me.
My main concern, though, is keeping the disambiguation page useful. I don't see it as "exclusive," but streamlined for a particular purpose: If someone is looking for something and it is probable they would enter just "Faust" to find it - and it is notable enough to have an article - it should probably be on that page. That's different than being a "work based on..." And its not "these are the best 'Faust' works." Its "these are the articles we have that you are looking for when you enter 'Faust.'" (John User:Jwy talk) 05:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prose fiction[edit]

Films[edit]


There's mnore to remove. No item should appear in the list without a WP:RS identifying it as part of the Faust mythos (and not simply a deal-with-the-devi motif); an awaful lot of trivial products should also be removed, I think...but that's of course much more a matter of judgment. DavidOaks (talk) 15:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for creating[edit]

I created this article so that I could remove the lists from Faust. I didn't care whether anyone would come to this page; and I still don't because of all the pointless items in the lists. Brainmuncher 13:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to read Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles. Still, you did a good thing in titling this the way it is, as opposed to, say, "Faust in popular culture". At least this way it's discriminating. Mangojuicetalk 04:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


There was a Wishbone episode also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wishbone_(TV_series) Sorry I don't have time to add it properly Andrew Carlssin 23:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Faustian[edit]

Some of the works listed here have faustian elements (for example Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith) but is that good enough? --RichardVeryard 17:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works based on the Faust legend[edit]

How is this page supposed to relate to the Category:Works based on the Faust legend? There is clearly some overlap. --RichardVeryard 17:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article title[edit]

The title of this article is a bit... unwieldy. What about "Works based on Faust"? - JasonAQuest (talk) 02:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about "Deals with the Devil in the arts"? Then works about deals with the Devil, but not specifically about Faust, could qualify. Troiscoins (talk) 04:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The (two and a half year old) suggestion was to change it to it current title. I'm not sure what it used to be. My preference would be to keep it to reasonably clear Faust references and pare down the list. Deals with the devil would be a different (super-)list. --John (User:Jwy/talk) 06:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Twilight series?[edit]

Is the Twilight series by Stephanie Mayer based on Faust? There certainly seems to be a strong Faustian element, particularly on the front cover... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.147.240 (talk) 10:45, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chronological Order[edit]

I think these lists should be arranged in chronological order. Right now they're just a randomly arranged hodgepodge, jumping from the 21st century to the 18th to the 20th, etc. Why list them in such a haphazard fashion? Let's put them in order. Chillowack (talk) 01:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Edit to only items with wikipedia pages that indicate how they are related to Faust[edit]

I think this page would be most useful if we ensure all the items are notable and based on Faust. I plan to review the list and if 1) there is not a wikipedia article on the item (would establish notability) or 2) that article does not mention Faust, I will move it to this talk page. Objections? If so, suggestions on what other criteria we might want to use?

Not going to rush into it... --John (User:Jwy/talk) 21:09, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this list needs major cleanup. These types of lists are generally wildly unsourced and seem to be up to the consensus judgment (thus original research) of editors. That said, the lists are useful. I suspect your method may remove like 90% of the list items, which aren't going to mention Faust in their articles, but I think a purge is good, forcing editors to find sources in order to add works back or new works. I do caution that the absence of a Wiki article on a work doesn't mean it is non-notable.
In my view, many if not most items on this list should be moved to the Deals with the Devil in popular culture list. Just because they feature a deal with the devil doesn't mean they are based on the Faust legend.
I also question whether this page is distinct enough from all the works in the Faust article. If it is supposed to be the difference between interpretation of the original classic tale, versus an adaptation or works inspired by Faust, then perhaps some of these items should move to that article, and vice-versa. Also see WP:IPCV. Thanks! ——Henry chianski (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Works based on Faust → Works related to Faust?[edit]

@Jwy and Henry chianski: Would changing the title and focus of the page slightly make it easier to verify each entry's relevance? Sorry all I can do is pose this question, but my real-life limitations almost certainly won't let me come back here to work on this. Thanks! —Geekdiva (talk) 06:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Ps.

If the title of this article does change, don't forget to change the wikilinked title on the Template:Faust navigation box. See↑? The name of the wikilink to this article (but not the target article) in the navbox title bar may need to change, even if this article's title remains the same, if the content and scope of the navbox is much wider than this article's, and especially if this is the only navbox on Faust. It's a related but separate issue. Thanks again! —Geekdiva (talk) 07:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Sarg Faust The Wicked Magician[edit]

A marionette play 68.237.141.117 (talk) 05:27, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Works_based_on_Faust&oldid=1207868183"