Talk:Actors' Equity Association

Theatre Mid‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organized Labour Mid‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spelling of "Theater"

I saw that "theater" had two different spellings on the page and changed them all to "theater", then I saw that someone else had recently specifically changed some (but not all) from "theater" to "theatre". While I prefer the American spelling for this article about this American organization, I don't really feel it's that big a deal which spelling is chosen, but I do more strongly feel that it should be spelled the same way throughout the article.Danorton (talk) 18:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling for the actors' art should be "Theatre", and for the building should be "Theater". See this interesting discussion on the origins of US/English spellings, thanks to Noah Webster: [1]. JohnClarknew (talk) 01:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "Kodak Theatre" on Hollywood Boulevard has it written thus, hewn in stone. Which seems to settle it once and for all. JohnClarknew (talk) 23:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changes Reverted

I'm reverting two changes:

The union infobox was deleted without comment - why?
Also restoring "Mark Zimmerman" as President - Patrick Quinn recently died and Zimmerman was elected to the position.[2]

--Chancemichaels 15:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Chancemichaels[reply]

A minor point just to complete the history above - Patrick Quinn resigned as president to become executive director. AEA press release JoanR 16:04, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

Regarding the addition of the NPOV box: This page seems to be extremely sympathetic of the organization to a fault. It describes opposition as exerting "iron-fisted dominance", and hails it with such weasel-wording as having "refused to bend to the will of the industry bosses". It then features a quote from Richard Masur which seems to serve little purpose besides point out that the AEA was particularly brave and noble in this endeavor, hardly an addition for an ideally NPOV section. I personally know about as little about the history of theatre as one can know, and even without any preconceptions to the contrary, this article still seems inappropriately biased and aggrandizing in favor of the AEA. Either the wording should be made more neutral, or the calims better justified by a more detailed history of the events at hand; as-is, not even links to article about events like the "famous strike" exist, much less summaries on the AEA page. MrWallet 23:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The offending phrases have been taken out, so I have removed the POV template. The Masur quote still needs to be cited, as does the article in general. --GentlemanGhost 16:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree-I can attest from working with a small theater company that there is a severe downside to AE69.9.28.202 04:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Present Day

The article is 95% on the history of the organization and not on the present day role of union, including the benefits of being a union member, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.111.85.50 (talk) 14:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

And its downsides. In general, the impact (both good and bad; both in and out of New York) of Equity on American theatre is an important topic in understanding it. 67.172.93.9 23:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is a good published source to gain a balanced understanding of Equity? If there is no source for a balanced approach, then what are the most reputable sources for criticism and support of Equity? Online sources of articles discussing these matters would be best. Keep in mind that this is an encyclopedic article and not an opinion piece, so the article cannot take a position, it must remain neutral or Wiki will shut it down. If all opinions can be presented fairly and accurately, in a balanced description, and properly referenced to reputable published sources, the article might be well received. I don't think this is a good forum for laying out specific union benefits, but a discussion of the comparative situations for theatre employees pre-union and after might be possible, if the discussion remains factual and balanced. The negative and positive roles of Equity would be difficult to present without bias. I am willing to dabble in this over the summer. I'm not in the theatre world, which allows me to be unbiased, but it also keeps me from knowing the best sources. Point me in the right direction. I have limited time, but I can try. If you provide sources, others can try as well. Feel free. Pat 00:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've attempted to include additional historical framework, but quite a bit more is left to be done. More details are needed about the fight against segregation, support for arts funding and the NEA, the fight against historic theaters being torn down, and the AIDS fight. Sourcing of some of the details about the Theatre Syndicate is needed. If someone can find out when AEA joined the AFL and include that date with a source, that would be useful. A broad description of the current role of the organization might be appropriate towards the beginning of the piece, but the information needs to be more encyclopedic and less like something you'd read on the organization's home page. Pat 01:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this article suffers by comparison with the article on its parallel organization, SAG. Needs more information on the nature of Equity rules, how one becomes eligible to join, etc. 96.232.208.7 (talk) 02:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alien performer issue

This case, filed by the NLRB, was instigated by Lynn Redgrave. She had been sued by Equity (under the leadership of Donald Grody) because she refused to part with 5% of her gross earnings from a US tour she financed with her own money, despite the fact that she was already a permanent resident. However, she lost the suit. That is when she went to the NLRB, and changed the course of US and British Equity's discriminatory practices towards each other. But unlike Yul Brynner, she did not get a refund (the ruling did not help those with earlier dates). I know because I was there. JohnClarknew (talk) 18:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page entirely rewritten?

New user 67.100.175.197 eliminated the page as it existed, and appears to feel that it is OK to re-write it, deleting references he/she doesn't like. The contribution history of this anonymous user appears to show that the account was created for the sole purpose of making these changes. Sorry, that cannot be done. Has the user heard of NPOV? The article now crosses that line. I am restoring the article as it appeared prior to the changes made on January 22, 2009. If the user wishes to re-write the introductory paragraph, fine. But the union has had its problems, which were addressed previously, and were deleted. JohnClarknew (talk) 06:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

67.100.175.197 has done it again, this time as 67.100.175.198. Please don't edit the page again. If you have problems with it, this is the page for discussion. JohnClarknew (talk) 23:16, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

template for members' user pages

Template:User AEA (talk · links · edit) may be placed on Equity members' user pages. — Robert Greer (talk) 03:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding More Relevant information to AEA

Copyediting suggestions

Hi I am a new user and I think that this page can be improved upon. The history page needs to have more information about the issues that Actor's Equity has encountered through their time as a union. Issues such as segregation and the AIDS scare are not discussed or explained in how they affected the union. Also there needs to be more information on the lawsuits that the AEU has encountered and how this has affected the union and its formation. In addition, since wikipedia prides its self in usually being neutral, this article seems to be very biased towards the union. For instance they do not offer much content as to what is wrong with the union and its problems and instead the article seems to promote that the union is all good and does not have negative characteristics. Also it is very strange when it comes to the deletion of the article, I think this must be checked because the information should be verified. Also the lack of present day information should be checked because when someone needs to be informed about the union they need current information about how the union functions in today's world. Jgruey (talk) 01:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Content Suggestions

I am a new user. After reading this article on the Actor's Equity Union, I do have some content suggestions for this page. This article is supposed to be completely unbiased, and a fair representation of the organization should be accessible. Therefore, in looking at the article, readers might not get the full story on the union and its background, including lawsuits involving actors. Mentioning both the pros and cons of the organization might be wise. Including the history involving these lawsuits is simply being accurate. Also, the “Causes” section of the article is choppy because it jumps quickly through the causes without many details on current causes that it supports. I feel that this section of the article could be increased. Simply researching more would help. I think that including more information about the current state of the organization would be helpful as well. Many actors would find it helpful to be able to find information about the current state of the organization. For instance, including current membership numbers, membership fees, and contact information would be helpful. Overall, simply give a more thorough overview of the entire organization. Adding content only increases this article's validity and usefulness.Kag0205 (talk) 03:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pabst Grand Circle Hotel…

…was not at 2 Columbus Circle. It was at the NW corner of 58th Street and 8th Avenue, succeeded by the New York Coliseum. See The Museum of the City of New York. Vzeebjtf (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Vzeebjtf (talk) 12:17, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifications

I don't understand the use of the word "book" in "live stage productions without a book"; would someone please expand the article to explain? It seems maybe it is a term industry insiders recognize but an encyclopedia is for everyone.

Also how does one join this union? Are there restrictions or preconditions? Is membership required for some types of work? Does joining bring other advantages? It seems this article could support several more details if someone has the knowledge to add them. Thanks. 72.208.62.126 (talk) 12:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Actors' Equity Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a 1919 Actors' Equity Association strike section

Hi Wikipedians, I am in a Technical and Professional Editing class and have been working on the 1919 Actors' Equity Association strike article as part of a project for the past few weeks. I noticed that this article has a section for the 1929 strike, so I wanted to propose adding a section for the 1919 strike that would include an overview of the strike as well as a "See main article" link that directs to that page. It seems like some of the content about this strike is currently included in the second paragraph of the history section, so I was thinking that content would be part of this new section instead. What are your thoughts? Slaurensk (talk) 04:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it AW (talk) 03:55, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Post-Kruse era and IWA/WIR?

What are these? They aren’t linked and aren’t clear. AW (talk) 03:55, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedic tone

The use of "you" and "yours" in the lead. 0m9Ep (talk) 15:46, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]