[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Talk:Academy Awards: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 527: Line 527:
:{{ping|Tim1357}} thanks for adding archive links to citations, but I believe you are supposed to add <code>|dead-url=no</code> if the url isn't dead. See the respective cite template documentation for details. [[User:Stevietheman|<font color="green">'''Stevie is the man!'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Stevietheman|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|Work]]</sup> 05:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
:{{ping|Tim1357}} thanks for adding archive links to citations, but I believe you are supposed to add <code>|dead-url=no</code> if the url isn't dead. See the respective cite template documentation for details. [[User:Stevietheman|<font color="green">'''Stevie is the man!'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Stevietheman|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|Work]]</sup> 05:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)


::Cool, TIL. --[[User:Tim1357|<font color="Blue" face="Arial" >Tim]]</font><font color="Red" face="Optima" >[[Special:Contributions/Tim1357|1357]]</font> <sup><font face="Times new roman" size = 2 >[[User talk:Tim1357|talk]]|<span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tim1357&action=edit&summary=Poke!&section=new&preload=User%3ATim1357/tbtemplate&preloadtitle=%7B%7Bsubst%3AREVISIONUSER%7D%7D%20%5Bhttp%3A//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php%3Fdiff%3D{{REVISIONID}}%20left%5D%20you%20a%20message%20at%20%5B%5B{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}%5D%5D%21 poke]</span></font></sup> 05:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
::Cool, TIL.

Revision as of 05:58, 25 September 2016

Former good article nomineeAcademy Awards was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed

Template:Vital article

Objectivity and professionalism

I'm getting a little tired of the unprofessional and biased edits that have been made to the "Criticism" section of this article lately. Look, I understand that we all have our little beefs with the Academy's choices, but rants, uncited speculation and unecessary additions to this section are inappropriate and should be deleted immediately. Personally, I'm okay with the section as it is now, but I won't discourage someone from editing or adding something to change it, as long as it actually contributes something and doesn't make Wikipedia look like a fanboy forum. -- metafact (talk) 5:20, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The running times for many of the movies are wrong

Look how many of the movies of the last 30 years claim to run more than 4 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.15.129.78 (talk) 01:15, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Those are the lengths of the ceremonies, not the BP winners. Crboyer (talk) 01:20, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

repetition?

  1. "For most categories, members from each of the branches vote to determine the nominees only in their respective categories (i.e. only directors vote for directors, writers for writers, actors for actors, etc.). There are some exceptions in the case of certain categories, like Foreign Film, Documentary and Animated Feature Film, in which movies are selected by special screening committees made up of members from all branches. In the special case of Best Picture, all voting members are eligible to select the nominees for that category."
  2. "The members of the various branches nominate those in their respective fields, while all members may submit nominees for Best Picture. The winners are then determined by a second round of voting in which all members are then allowed to vote in most categories, including Best Picture."

Isn't the first sentence of the second paragraph saying exactly what the first paragraph has already stated? CapnZapp (talk) 16:23, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved per consensus. bd2412 T 20:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Academy Award → Academy Awards – Why does the title prefer the award itself (singular), rather than the name of the ceremony (plural)? While the article includes information about the statuette given at the ceremony, it is generally about the ceremony itself -- the 'award' is just one facet of what the article discusses. I apologize if this has already been hashed over, but I have searched through the talk history and cannot find any justification for this naming. Perhaps there is just something I'm not seeing here. I am open to hearing feedback on the matter, but I feel it should be renamed. CrunchySkies (talk) 16:51, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per WP:SINGULAR, which states to pursue the singular form over the plural form. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 17:00, 17 January 2014 (UTC) Sorry, I did not look at this closely. I was thinking that the article discussed the award itself, but it seems like "Academy Awards" is akin to "scissors" in the WP:SINGULAR exception. Obviously, the individual categories' article titles are singular. I think I would support this move, but I am wondering if it was not possible to have a stand-alone article about the award, apart from the ceremony itself. Would like to hear others' thoughts first. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 17:04, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Upon skimming Oscar (disambiguation), I think not only "Oscar statuette" (the current section heading) is practically available to title an article that focuses on the trophy, but also "The Oscar" with hatnote link to The Oscar (film). --P64 (talk) 19:44, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Singular and plural Award(s)

On the Awards project talk page I have raised the general matter of naming articles about periodic sets of awards that share a name, as the Academy Awards do. But the articles do not feature annual events or seasons associated with the awards per se; some are mere lists of winners with short prefaces. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards and prizes‎#Singular and plural Award(s)

--P64 (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Split

The rename discussion includes some remarks that pertain to splitting the article. One possibility is to cover the trophy or statuette in a separate article (Oscar?) that would be {{main}} article for a shorter section 2.

Interjection. Another possibility is to cover the award(s) in one article and the seasonal event(s) in another.

Award (Academy Award?)

  • sections 2-3 and 7-8; much of 9-10; most of 12
  • origin including predecessors, false starts, early competitors
  • past and present (and proposed?) Award categories including links to all the lists of winners or nominees
  • consequences for the candidates (reputation, compen$ation, longevity) including winners and any who are known as losers
  • criticism of the all that stuff, including general criticism of who gets nominated and who wins
Interjection. Some of this material on the Award(s) per se is unclear in scope. For example, does section 3 Nominations pertain to all of the awards or all those covered in section 9 Merit categories or all those that confer the Oscar statuette. --P64 (talk) 20:13, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Event(s) (The Oscars?) -- presumably main article for Category:Academy Awards ceremonies

If not split then some reorganization is appropriate, probably including combination of secs 4-6 and 11 as one Ceremony or Presentation(s) section with subsections.

--P64 (talk) 18:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think we should wait until the suggested move is closed before discussing splitting the article. I do not support renaming the ceremony article "The Oscars," so I disagree with this at the moment. -- Wikipedical (talk) 19:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Format of dates

In this article, there are many dates that are formatted incorrectly (e.g., using 1 February 2014 instead of February 1, 2014). Clearly, the Academy Awards is based in the USA; the USA date formats should be used in the article. I went through and changed a few, and then I noticed that there were many, many more that need changing. Is there some reason they are listed in the alternate format? Am I missing something here? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you're missing anything. It seems straightforward that the U.S. style of date formatting should apply here. My guess is that editors sometimes instinctively use date format they are used to without realize it's inconsistent with the format for that article. I've done it myself without realizing it. I've seen editors do it before with both date formatting and national varieties of English. --JamesAM (talk) 23:28, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The top of the article has the template {{use dmy dates}} instructing bots and people to use "1 January 2016" instead of "January 1, 2016". Is there a reason? -- GreenC 12:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be easy to switch to mdy dates. Any objections? Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Selection procedure

The selection procedure is covered primarily in section 3 Nominations, which should be renamed. It needs update at least because subsec 3.1 Voting ends thus: "In May 2011, the Academy sent a letter advising its 6,000 or so voting members that an online system for Oscar voting will be implemented in 2013.[29]" Perhaps also because subsec 3.2 Rules includes this: "In late December ballots and copies of the Reminder List of Eligible Releases are mailed to around 6000 active members." Section 3 also needs attention to #Format of dates. --P64 (talk) 20:09, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics

An interesting age analysis of oscar winners and nominees at [3]. Could be useful for the article so I will the link here in case anyone wants to incorporate some of the data into the article. Betty Logan (talk) 00:28, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Model for statuette?

This article claims Emilio Fernández was the model for the Oscar statue, but the article on Emilio Fernández says there is no historical evidence for that. Which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.119.205.88 (talk) 22:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The official AMPAS page on the Oscar here specifically mentions that no model was used for designing the statuette, and no citation is already provided for Emilio Fernández having been a model. Therefore I'm considering making this change with the mentioned reference. I'm also removing this reference as it's not related to and doesn't provide information regarding the content.

Sir Ali (talk) 14:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Producers of Academy Award winners

I'm clearing out the 'Academy Award winners' category, moving people to relevant subcategories, or removing them altogether if their names are not included on the official Academy Awards database. I have a query about the status of film producers, who do not appear to be served by any of the relevant subcategories. Should they be created? How would they be named? Gareth E Kegg (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2015

The correct number of awards given out is 2,853. The former number is before this years Oscars. Gabraden99 (talk) 20:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 00:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2015

The page List of films with all four Academy Award acting nominations should be added to the lists section on the Academy Awards page. 190.194.10.99 (talk) 15:30, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Stickee (talk) 10:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Membership count

The AMPAS About page mentions 7000+ as the number of its members as of 2015-03-16. Should Academy_of_Motion_Picture_Arts_and_Sciences and Academy_Awards articles be updated to reflect this update? Mr. Ali (talk) 14:57, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 April 2015

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result was not moved, early close per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:16, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

– Per WP:COMMONNAME. The event is most commonly described as the Oscars, not the Academy Awards, both officially and unofficially. See here for article hits and coverage from the BBC, the New York Times, the Washington Post and The Telegraph. Other reliable sources act likewise. The event was officially renamed as The Oscars in 2013 (source, source). The trophy has been described by the Academy as an Oscar since 1939 (source). 31.54.158.36 (talk) 13:10, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was officially (and formally) renamed: The rest of the world may have been calling the Academy Awards 'The Oscars' for years, but now organisers have made the nickname official. source As well as now formally being called the Oscars, it has, for many years, been referred to as the Oscars much more commonly than the Academy Awards. Have a look at WP:COMMONNAME. 31.54.158.36 (talk) 13:37, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
--Birdienest81 (talk) 00:59, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Created the 88th Academy Awards as a redirect for now

88th Academy Awards-which someone can create into a page when the time comes. Wgolf (talk) 21:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Biopic

You have Life of Emile Zola as the first biopic; but The Great Ziegfeld is a biopic and won the year prior. On the Milestone page for Best Pics. 50.187.211.34 (talk) 23:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Academy Awards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

I created the change on the main page under the history section. I discussed the addition of the Animated feature category because it is important in the history of the awards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick5792 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed drama bias

I removed this sentence:

From 1927 to 2001 around 49% of Best Picture nominated films had been categorized as a drama and out of the 432 films to be analyzed within that time 47% of the winning films were in fact dramas.[1]

Since it is obviously original research and nonsense: Almost half of all produced movies are dramas, so it is ridicolous to speak of a bias if also almost half of the nominated movies are dramas. --84.62.83.13 (talk) 00:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Academy Awards - The Oscars". Retrieved 23 August 2015.

::It comes from a WP:RS. You need to read WP:OR to understand the difference between an editor making up figures and an outside WP:SECONDARY source quoting them. MarnetteD|Talk 01:12, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For example your claim that half of all movies are dramas is WP:OR. MarnetteD|Talk 01:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It does not actually come from a reliable source - there is nothing on the webpage cited giving those numbers or percentages, and no mention of which movies are classified as dramas and which are not. That is original research - which includes "any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources". Melcous (talk) 05:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The figures are original research. But even if they weren't: Using these figures to accuse the Academy Awards of a bias at Wikipeda would be original research anyway. --178.9.87.0 (talk) 16:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clearing things up and removing the item [[User:|Melcous]] and thanks to the IP for removing the item the first time as well. MarnetteD|Talk 17:00, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2016 controversy

Is someone writing something about the 2016 Oscar controversy re racial bias ? Juicebaby (talk) 08:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Academy Awards. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added Archives

Here is a list of archives/accessdates that I added to this article.

Reference edited Actions taken
The Oscars – Feb 24th 2013 +archive_url, date (archived on 23 December 2014)
Oscar Statuette +archive_url, date (archived on 26 October 2015)
History of the Academy Awards +access_date (first seen 27 September 2009)
[http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Entertainment/meet-emilio-fernandez-face-oscars/story?id=18550020 Meet the Mexican Model Behind the Oscar Statue

]

+archive_url, date (archived on 5 March 2016)
Oscar Statuette +archive_url, date (archived on 15 January 2016)
Oscar 3453 is 'born' in Chicago factory +access_date (first seen 23 August 2015);+archive_url, date (archived on 10 March 2014)
THE ACADEMY AND POLICH TALLIX FINE ART FOUNDRY REVIVE THE ART OF OSCAR STATUETTES +archive_url, date (archived on 27 February 2016)
Oscar Statuette Gets a Face-Lift – This year's statuettes will be produced by Polich Tallix Fine Art Foundry and will be hand-cast in bronze before receiving their 24-karat gold finish. +archive_url, date (archived on 18 February 2016)
OSCAR STATUETTES, longtime creation of Chicago-based company, will now be made in New York +archive_url, date (archived on 8 March 2016)
Cinema: Oscars +access_date (first seen 16 May 2008)
[http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/oscar-statues-include-engraved-names-20476 Oscar statues to include engraved names

]

+access_date (first seen 1 March 2015);+archive_url, date (archived on 12 April 2015)
[http://parade.com/266251/stevedaly/governors-ball-secrets-welcome-to-the-engraving-station-where-oscar-statuettes-get-personalized/ Governors Ball Secrets: Welcome to the 'Engraving Station,' Where Oscar Statuettes Get Personalized

]

+access_date (first seen 1 March 2015);+archive_url, date (archived on 27 February 2015)
Electronic Voting Comes to The Oscars (Finally) +access_date (first seen 25 February 2012)
Oscars Submission FAQ +archive_url, date (archived on 1 April 2015)
[http://www.youbioit.com/en/article/shared-information/949/academy-and-its-oscar-awards The Academy and its Oscar Awards – Reminder List of Eligible Releases

]

+access_date (first seen 12 March 2010)
Oscars: The wacky way the Academy counts votes, and the results of our 'If You Were an Oscar Voter' poll +archive_url, date (archived on 6 May 2016)
The Oscars' messed-up voting process, explained +archive_url, date (archived on 11 March 2016)
Oscar's 'In Memoriam' segment is touching to watch, painful to make +archive_url, date (archived on 6 March 2010)
Cut … all change at Oscars as winners are given just 45 seconds to say thanks +access_date (first seen 17 February 2010)
Can the 'thank-you scroll' save Oscar speeches? +archive_url, date (archived on 28 February 2016)
ABC's Oscar Contract Renegotiations: Who'll Get Creative Control? +archive_url, date (archived on 2 March 2016)
Inside the Oscars Deal: What it Means for ABC and the Academy +archive_url, date (archived on 1 September 2016)
Academy's red carpet big stage for advertisers +access_date (first seen 5 March 2008)
Oscars lack blockbuster to lure TV viewers +archive_url, date (archived on 15 September 2006)
Low Ratings Crash Party +archive_url, date (archived on 11 June 2010)
Oscar ratings worst ever +access_date (first seen 28 February 2008)
It's Time to Create an Oscar For Stunt Coordinators +access_date (first seen 13 January 2013)
Jack Gill Interview +access_date (first seen 13 January 2013)
Academy Votes Against Creating Oscar Category for Stunt Coordinators +access_date (first seen 12 February 2012)
Can a Boycott Change the Oscars? +archive_url, date (archived on 4 February 2016)
Academy Promises 'Historic' Changes to Diversify Membership +archive_url, date (archived on 3 February 2016)
George C Scott: The man who refused an Oscar +access_date (first seen 27 March 2009)
Show Business: Meat Parade +access_date (first seen 27 March 2009)
Kantar Media Reports On The Advertising Vitality Of The Academy Awards – Historical Advertising Data Showcases Ad Pricing Trends and Top Marketers; Super Bowl Overlap Increases as Sales Rise +archive_url, date (archived on 20 April 2013)
Sunday Final Ratings: Oscars Adjusted Up +archive_url, date (archived on 22 October 2015)
The Oscars Beat The Super Bowl In Advertising Premium +archive_url, date (archived on 14 October 2015)

--Tim1357 talk|poke 04:42, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim1357: thanks for adding archive links to citations, but I believe you are supposed to add |dead-url=no if the url isn't dead. See the respective cite template documentation for details. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 05:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, TIL. --Tim1357 talk|poke 05:58, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Academy_Awards&oldid=741068331"