Talk:Academy Awards

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Academy Award)
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee Academy Awards was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are 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.
September 22, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Film (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is on the project's core list.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Film awards task force.
WikiProject Awards and prizes (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards and prizes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Objectivity and professionalism[edit]

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[edit]

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

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


  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)

Suggested move[edit]

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)

Academy AwardAcademy 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)

  • 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)
  • I would argue that the article should be renamed "The Oscars" because as of last year I believe, the award ceremony was officially renamed that.--Coin945 (talk) 17:56, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support move to Academy Awards, as long as the articles about the individual awards still us the singular "Academy Award for". Fortdj33 (talk) 18:38, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support move to Academy Awards. In practice, it is short for "Academy Awards ceremony." -- Wikipedical (talk) 19:12, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support move. But the name is not so much short for the ceremony, or "Academy Awards Presentations" as they say, but the entire annual phenomenon, at least the public competitive season that begins with announcement of the nominees.
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)
  • Comment: How about we create List of Academy Award categories (based on what this article has) and redirect Academy Award there? It seems like searching for "Academy Award" (the award itself) could be distinct from "Academy Awards" (the ceremony). Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 19:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong support since the article is seemingly mostly about the ceremony and the concept, less so about the award itself. We might split the article? Red Slash 22:05, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Alternate use "Oscar" in some manner, as it's more common -- (talk) 03:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Not given to a single person, need to be moved. It's stated official web site Maurice07 (talk) 13:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: With the recent announcement of this season's nominations, it seems that many reliable news sources are starting to use "Oscar"[1] more than "Academy Award".[2] Even the official web site uses "Oscar" more than "Academy Award". IMO, "Academy Award" has never been a precise title since there are other academies, such the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences with their own "academy awards". Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:35, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Maybe we should give further consideration to "The oscars". Say "Academy Award" to someone on the street and chances are they won't know what you are talking about. Everyone knows what the "oscars" are though, and if that is now the official name it seems a no brainer to me. Betty Logan (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support – as per Red Slash. -- Shudde talk 10:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Support move. There seems to be a need for a separate article on the figurine, the Oscar, and its history. I would guess that the history of this article is ambiguous on what it is about, and that needs to be resolved/clarified through a split.Haberstr (talk) 08:32, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
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)[edit]

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)


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)

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)

  • 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)

Format of dates[edit]

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)

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)

Selection procedure[edit]

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)


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)