Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Film awards task force

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Films
General information ( v • d • e )
Main project page + talk
 → Discussion archives
Style guidelines talk
Announcements and open tasks talk
 → Articles needing attention talk
 → Nominations for deletion talk
 → New articles talk
 → Requests talk
 → Stubs talk
Resources
Showcase
Film Portal talk
Fiction noticeboard talk


Contents

[edit] Trademark

There's absolutely no obligation whatsoever to use the trademark symbols or disclaim affiliation with the American Motion Picture Association. We are not trading on the name of the Academy Awards; there's absolutely no trademark violation.

Catering to this is visually unappealing, and it makes Wikipedia look like complete toadies. We don't do it for any of the other hundreds of thousands of registered and unregistered trademarks in Wikipedia, and we shouldn't do it here.

There's more info on using trademark symbols in the GNU Coding Standards. --ESP 21:38, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Look man, I know, but ABC, which has a deal with Oscar, uses TM/R/C symbols on stuff they do, and they have a * deal* with Oscars. The Oscar people are * incredibly** incredibly* defensive of their copyrights. We may be legally correct, but I doubt we'll be feeling cocky when Wikipedia gets the inevitable cease-and-desist letter, or whatever letter, from AMPAS. I beg you to surrender to the toadying... :) jengod 21:41, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
ABC uses the TM/R/SM stuff because they have a deal with the Academy. We don't. We don't have to use the trademark stuff. m:Avoid copyright paranoia. --ESP 01:27, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ok, whats this page meant for ? What happens now. Jay 16:12, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ok its meant for List of Academy Awards ceremonies. Thank (Jen)God ! Jay 06:26, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Links

Do we want to link to the various award pages? Like Academy Award for Best Picture. RickK 04:21, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

A fine plan! I'm too lazy to do it right now, but that's a great added dimension. jengod

[edit] Proposal to simplify categories

I believe Category:Academy Awards ceremonies should be deleted and all articles such as 76th Academy Awards should appear only in Category:Academy Awards. That would make the category structure simpler, easier to use, and more logical (after all, the Xth Academy Award articles don't just talk about the ceremonies, they also give the winners of the awards). In addition, sortkeys should be added so the articles show up in numerical order. I would prefer a format such as [[Category:Academy Awards|* 076]] — or possibly the "* " could be replaced by "#". - dcljr (talk) 03:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oppose - this would make the main Category:Academy Awards crowded, something which is discouraged in WP:CG (see Wikipedia:Categorization#Large categories). The ceremonies subcat should remain as is. Dl2000 15:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category cleanup

Just did a run through the individual Academy Award year pages, to update the categories for consistency. It became clear from the other awards listed and the general categorisation approach that the years of individual subcategories Category:Film awards by year were based on the release dates of films, rather than the actual ceremony dates. For example, the ceremonies under Category:1999 film awards were held in early 2000 or late 1999, but these were based on films released in 1999. That style of categorisation may sound a bit confusing, but that was the consensus. There is still some consistency work to be done on award categories and templates in general. Dl2000 17:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Potential images

Could the project make use of one or more of these images as found through the Wikimedia Commons?

1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 Image:Oscarstatuette3.jpg 9 10
Excellent searching. I like Image 1, personally. It's simple, yet it gets the point across. --Miguel Cervantes 03:33, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I changed the image on the WikiProject template to number one because it was far more Academy Awards-ey than a reel and film. However, this is only temporary; we need to decide which image to use. --Miguel Cervantes 13:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Table format updating

A few issues with the winners tables as currently set:

  1. Feature Films table - need to get straight whether the rightmost column is to list the Producer or Director.
  2. Tables for the winner lists can have varying widths from section to section, which gives an inconsistent appearance.
  3. Headings are centre-aligned, while rows are left-aligned - that makes the entries a bit difficult to scan.
  4. Writing: Example gives story/screenplay split in Original screenplay - should be under Adapted screenplay category.

A) What about a single table for all winners (some categories don't have tables and look out of place among the tables)?

B) If separate tables kept, how about this adjustment to the table format?:

Feature Films

Category Winner Directors/Country
Best motion picture of the year Film Director
Best foreign language film Film Country of origin
Best documentary feature Film Director
Best animated feature film of the year Film Director

Acting

Category Winner Movie
Best actor in a leading role Winner Film
Best actress in a leading role Winner Film
Best actor in a supporting role Winner Film
Best actress in a supporting role Winner Film

Writing

Category Winner Movie
Original screenplay Author Film
Adapted screenplay Author1 (story)
Author2 (screenplay)		 Film

Dl2000 22:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been working on getting a standard system to use on entries, and most of the material is a copy and paste from the 39th Academy Awards, which I in turn stole from last year's ceremony. I don't think too much thought went into them, and I don't know if I would have thought of these changes. The tables are good (I'll probably change the Table Codes page tomorrow); the changes improve the quality and bring about more standardization. I'm not sure if we should use one big table, however, as that would make browsing slightly harder. If we can ever get some more people to join this project (I saw someone putting up some banners for it a few days ago, but I haven't seen him since), maybe we can get some more input. If not, I suppose an RfC could help.--Miguel Cervantes 03:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
1. We can agree on separate tables - just wanted to put the one-table idea on the table.
2. The table format can also apply to the Music, Technical and Short Films categories. 75th Academy Awards would be a good example of winners that need tables.
3. Director section usually only has one winner - a table might help visual consistency, but it might also be overkill.
4. Just checked the Oscars database (www.oscars.org) - seems Best Picture winner lists show the Producers rather than Directors, so that may be the official approach. Need a bit more research to confirm that.
5. My reading of RfC is that it's more for serious disputes which I don't believe we have here. Perhaps better to raise the table/content issues at Village Pump Assistance (WP:VPA) for others to review?
Dl2000 03:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Main Page

One of our articles, 34th Academy Awards, made it to the Main Page. Hopefully this can draw some more attention to the WikiProject. Now we just need to get Academy Awards to featured status.--Miguel Cervantes 01:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
  • User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
  • User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
  • User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 23:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification needed for Award for Directing

Hi, I have posted my questing in Talk:Academy Award for Directing#Award /Achievement for Directing /Best Director but it may be out of the way there. I am updating the series of years in film, mentioning more awards where missing, and I need please this clarification to make corrections. Hoverfish 09:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Best Foreign Film LONG LIST

Hi. I am very interested in what some call the long list. I found 15 lists, the oldest beeing Submissions for the 65th Academy Award for Best Foreign Film, but these awards have been given since 1956. Dose anyone have the remaining 37 lists? I quote one wikipedia pate "For many years, the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) has invited each country to select one film to compete in the Best Foreign Language Film at the Oscars." --User:Steinninn 19:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Road to the 76th Academy Awards

Is this an appropriate item to have out there? I was thinking that Road to the 76th Academy Awards would be better placed under 76th Academy Awards if it is placed anywhere. I am not working on this project, but I wanted to bring it to the team's attention. Slavlin 22:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WPFilms categorization problem

Hi, this is from the new WP Films Categorization department. We have a discussion about some lengthy Acad. Award categories that are given to film articles and make the category section almost unreadable. Please, see here*. Could a more concise naming be given (see suggestion)? The main event being Best Film or Best Actor, is hard to even find in some films. IMO it would be better to have a template with Awards including nominations and not assign such specific categories below the main winners. Soon more awards may do the same and it will get practically unreadable under the first line of categories. Another issue is the stated WP Films as parent project of this project. I think your scope is wider than Films. Actors, directors, etc belong to WP Biographies... Hoverfish Talk 14:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Academy Award

I've created a new portal for the Academy Awards.Please contribute as much as possible. Jairus Garin 16:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] flags in articles

The articles that list nominees and winners in the acting categories currently include little flags next to every actor indicating his/her country of origin. I propose that this is unnecessary, visually confusing, and subtly POV-pushing because a lot of these people are multi-national with citizenship in various places, and sometimes you'll see TWO flags (like Daniel Day-Lewis), or the flag of a country of birth but not the country of primary life-long citizenship (like Jessica Tandy.) Furthermore, some articles (like Best Actress) use the Union Jack for English actors, but others (like Best Actor) use different flags for England, Scotland, and Wales depending on what nationality an editor has decided to assign to an actor. All of this, however, doesn't even approach the question of why the flags are there to begin with; they don't impart any useful or trenchant information, and in fact they are simply irrelevant to the articles at hand. It seems like these flags should just be gotten rid of! Thoughts?-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 15:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Road To The __th Academy Awards' articles

For these articles, for example Road to the 79th Academy Awards, wouldn't it be better to have those awards in which the winners are restricted in some way, such as the European Film Awards, which are restricted to European films, in a different colour. That way, the tallies of winners could exclude these awards - this would eliminate the problem of seemingly anomalous winnners at these ceremonies, and would ensure that all films are able to win the tallied awards. Ygoloxelfer 09:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Winners without articles

I noticed that a lot of the winners in Best Original Screenplay don't have articles. Is there anybody working on that, or other major categories where there are a lot of redlinked winners? Seems to me that even within the field of popular culture it's a lot more important than the kind of fancruft that pumps up the Wikipedia article count. --Orange Mike 23:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Road to the XXth Academy Awards

Just FYI, I have nominated these articles for deletion. (See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Road to the 76th Academy Awards.) I wanted to let the project team know as well, in case you wanted to weigh in. It already seems to be leaning towards deleting all and merging the data into the respective winner pages. Slavlin 16:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "19xx Academy Awards" redirects

I just found (fixing a link on The Passion of the Christ) out that probably all the redirects in the form of 19xx Academy Awards point to the wrong year... Ie. 2004 Academy Awards redirects to 76th Academy Awards, which are the awards for 2003. So they are pointing to the year the ceremony was held, instead of the year the movies came out, as the generic Academy Awards template suggests. Is this indeed correct, or should I go ahead and fix all the redirects? (which is gonna be hell checking all links to the redirects...) --Edokter (Talk) 22:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Interesting problem, but we should compare with how year titles of other major awards are handled, such as these examples for 2006:
So it seems that year titles tend to represent the year the award ceremony was conducted, rather than the year in which the qualifying works were produced. This suggests we should leave the yyyy Academy Awards redirects alone, unless some need fixing to consistently point to the ceremony year. We should add specs for the proper Academy Awards article title format and names for redirects in the main project page, though, if there is consensus on this. Dl2000 00:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I think all redirects are consistent in that regard. If the names should point to the year the ceremony was held, then {{Academy Awards Chron}} and related templates should be fixed. --Edokter (Talk) 10:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Fixed the years in {{Academy Awards}} (redir from former Chron template) as suggested, and as consistent with other major entertainment awards. Dl2000 01:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • So as I understand it, we should follow how other Wikipedia articles say list the ceremonies instead of the Academy's official database search engine. [1] Zzyzx11 (Talk) 02:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Of course, it presents some confusion since the awards ceremony itself is held on the next calender year than the year of consideration. But every official publication from the Academy I have seen lists their ceremonies in that fashion i.e. the 79th Academy Awards is listed with the 2006 date, and The Departed is the 2006 Best Picture winner. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Last thing we need is an edit war! I agree the years should point to the year of the ceremony, since that is 1) the most popular use, and 2) would save a bunlde of work fixing all the redirects. So let's please make up our mind. I know it's evil but...

[edit] Linked years should reflect the year of the ceremony

[edit] Support

  1. See my comments. --Edokter (Talk) 13:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  2. Also see my comments. Key issue is that readers can expect a consistent approach from Wikipedia entertainment award templates. Film vs. ceremony years can be explained in the main Academy Award article. Dl2000 22:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  3. It is good to be consistent in all awards. Hoverfish Talk 08:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

May be too late, but I strongly oppose veering from Academy convention that was established LONG before the Internet (much less Wikipedia). Under current rules, the Oscar year (except for Foreign Language Film) is the calendar year of the Los Angeles County qualifying run, which is either the year of release (most commonly) or the following year (most famously for Casablanca). Using the year of the awards ceremony not only violates Academy policy, but is also too confusing when referring to early Oscar history (two ceremonies were held in 1930, for example).

The Grammy and Golden Globe redirects used to justify the change are wrong; NARAS and HFPA both use the prior year in referring to their awards. The Tony, Primetime Emmy, and Juno Awards examples are irrelevant because they are consistent with the policies of ATW/LATP, ATAS and CARAS respectively; the Tony & Primetime Emmy (but not Juno) eligibility years also close in the same calendar year as the ceremony (unlike the Oscars, Grammys & Globes). --RBBrittain 09:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

  • I do not really care as long as there is a footnote or something on each affected template and article so there is no confusion on what naming convention we are using i.e. it is different that that of the official Academy records. Also, are you considering modifying every single Academy Awards page using the unofficial system. For instance, Academy Award for Best Picture currently says "2006 (79th) The Departed". It would be more confusing if the articles in Category:Academy Awards and all of its sub-categories were not uniform across the board. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • No. We're only talking about the years in redirects and templates. The 19xx (and 200x) redirects point to a different edition then the template links with the same year. --Edokter (Talk) 10:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Then if that is the case, I would rather have something like Template:SuperBowl and a redirect like 2007 Super Bowl. Similar idea - the game was played in 2007, but the winner is regarded as the 2006 champion.
70th (1997) • 71st (1998) • 72nd (1999) • 73rd (2000) • 74th (2001) • 75th (2002) • 76th (2003) • 77th (2004) • 78th (2005) • 79th (2006) • 80th (2007)

Zzyzx11 (Talk) 11:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

  • I just noticed that the years in the template are (already) listed under "Ceremonies". In that respect, Dl2000's edit to {{Academy Awards}} was indeed correct after all, and would fix all indiscrepancies between templates and redirects. So I'll be bold and revert the template to his version. I tried the 79th (2006) format, but it really bloats the template. --Edokter (Talk) 13:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Do you wonder why it was on a seperate template before an anon user merged both of them? [2] Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Not really. I didn't even know there was a seperate template. I came here when I found the dicrepancies from a link on a movie page, and the templates seems to have been merged weeks ago, so it never crossed my mind. --Edokter (Talk) 23:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I support, but would like to point out that in some festival lists (Golden Bear, Palme d'Or) the year given is the year of the films release. Now this could be because they premiered in the Festivals, but I haven't checked them all to know if this is the case everywhere. Hoverfish Talk 08:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Also the idea of having a footnote to indicate that the year is for when the ceremony was held, is quite useful. It took me some time to figure it out and to this day I'm never sure which year is given in an award and have to go looking to make sure. I suggest a <small> text as a note under the navigation box, or even as a mini caption just above it. Hoverfish Talk 08:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is now on RFD

Sorry I did not see it earlier but it looks like those redirects might change back, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 23#2007 Oscars → 80th Academy Awards. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of "Best" in category names

For anyone interested, AMPAS only has one Academy Award with "Best" in the name: Best Picture. All other awards should not include "Best" in the name. For the most part, the public uses "Best" for everything: Best Actress, Best Costume Design, etc. This is incorrect. Wikipedia, as maintained by the public, also uses "Best" everywhere, and should be corrected as well, since most articles and list use "Best" for all categories. If you don't believe this to be true, go to AMPAS sources and you find this is consistant. Or, just call the Academy and ask them.TienTao 21:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, Wikipedia's guidelines on naming conventions prefer the terms that are most common by the majority of English speakers, not the official terms. Unfortunately for the Academy, it seems most of the media, and therefore most common usage, use "Best" everywhere. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that clarification. It helps to know the rules of wikipedia! Though I disagree with it (why should wikipedia wish to provide inaccurate information?), it is acceptable. Though, for the record, I wasn't suggesting that all categories be changed to official names, which for example would be something like, "Academy Award of Merit for Outstanding Achievement in Animated Short Film." But I know what you mean. TienTao 17:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eligibility for Cinematography award: at one time was membership in a union/guild required by the rules?

Please see my query at Talk:Academy Award for Best Cinematography. --Mathew5000 08:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Henry Fonda

Henry Fonda has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Grim-Gym 02:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merger with Wikipedia:WikiProject Films

For purposes of centralized discussion, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films#Proposed merger with Academy Awards WikiProject. Thank you. John Carter 19:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Retagging

Am I right in thinking all articles tagged with {{AcademyAwardsproj}} need retagging as {{film}} with Awards-task-force=yes and the old banner removing? RWardy 09:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

"Need" is a big word, but, yeah, I have to think retagging the articles would definitely be a good idea. John Carter 15:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of merging of academy awards articles

Hi, A discussion has been started on the Film talk page regarding merging nominee and winner articles with the actual ceremony article. You can see and contribute to the discussion here. Cheers RWardy 08:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Academy Award records

An editor has requested that this receive attention from the community with an eye towards fixing rather than deleting. At the moment, it's a collection of unsourced trivia that could easily be construed as original research. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 01:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Golden Film on the way to FA

Recently the film award article Golden Film was not promoted to featured article, due to a lack of votes and comments after the featured article director restarted the nomination. With your help with the current peer review, I believe the article about this box office award can soon be promoted to featured article. Thanks! – Ilse@ 12:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Vote for Golden Film now on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Golden Film. Thank you for your help! – Ilse@ 17:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FLC - List of Academy Award winners and nominees for Best Foreign Language Film

I recently created a List of Academy Award winners and nominees for Best Foreign Language Film and have been working to improve it for quite some time now. The article about the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film had become too long and contained too much textual material, so I thought it would be good to have two separate articles, one for the description of the award itself and one for the list of winners and nominees. The latter is currently a featured list candidate, and with your help and comments it could become the first Academy Awards-related article to become part of Wikipedia's featured content ! If it is promoted, I promise to start working on other Academy Awards articles. Thanks ! BomBom (talk) 16:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Awards formatting on crew

Can someone please point me to the proper formatting for an awards table or list for a NON ACTOR? I have looked at three different articles and seen three different methods. EraserGirl (talk) 03:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure that a "proper" format exists. Perhaps you could link to several examples and we could discuss the strengths and weakness of each, and hammer out some sort of style guidelines in the process? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)