| Revision as of 00:37, 22 January 2011 editYaksar (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers9,871 edits →Edit Warning: new section← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 01:53, 27 June 2024 edit undoNicfromthethrift (talk | contribs)5 edits #talk-topicTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit |
| (77 intermediate revisions by 46 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{tmbox |
|
|
| small = |
|
|
| type = delete |
|
|
| text = The related ''']''' has been nominated for '''deletion, merging, or renaming]''' You are encouraged to join the ''']''' on the ] page. <!-- Generated by Template:Cfdnotice --> |
|
|
}}] |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C| |
|
|
{{WikiProject Film|American-task-force=yes|Awards-task-force=yes}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Awards|importance=Low}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Comedy|importance=mid}} |
|
⚫ |
}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
| Line 10: |
Line 10: |
|
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|archive = Talk:Golden Raspberry Award/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Golden Raspberry Awards/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell |
|
|
|1 = {{Film|class=start|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=no|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|American-task-force=yes|Awards-task-force=yes|core=yes}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Awards|importance=Low|class=Start}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{Comedy|class=start|importance=mid}} |
|
| ⚫ |
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== What's wrong with this article == |
|
|
|
|
|
I see that I'm not alone in finding this article inferior. Here's a quick list of what is wrong with it. (Of course the anti-IP admins will ignore it because of their "holier-than-thou" attitude, but at least I tried. I won't be back to see if I got anywhere so feel free to ignore it.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Worst Golden Raspberry Awards by the year == |
|
1 - The lead section is overly detailed and redundant. The sentence "Wilson traditionally held potluck dinner parties at his house in Los Angeles on the night of the Academy Awards, and decided to formalize the event after watching a double feature of Can't Stop the Music and Xanadu. " is imbalanced. The lead should be concise, and this isn't. "The event began as an informal gathering in Wilson's house in 1981 but quickly expanded." |
|
|
2 - The second paragraph of the lead almost duplicates the following opening paragraph of the history section. This makes the article clunky and amateurish. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] and ] are Golden Raspberry awards for worst films and shouldn't watch it. ] (]) 00:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
There you go, now ignore away. Perhaps you should semi-protect the talk page as well because an IP dared to make a comment here. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|
|
:I plan to greatly expand the rest of the article. At that point, the lede in comparison will actually seem quite small in size. At this point in time, the lede adequately satisfies ]. ''']''' (]) 04:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
::At this point in time, the lead is a ridiculous regurgitation of sentences copied from the rest of the article. Maybe when/if you get around to expanding the article that won't be a problem, but in the meantime this article is worthy of a Razzie itself. -] (]) 20:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
::P.S. Please read ]. - ] (]) 20:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Per ], the lede of an article is supposed to function as a ''standalone summary'' of the entire article. This lede accomplishes that. Reducing the lede to a mere couple of sentences merely because of the ''current'' size of the rest of the article, would be inappropriate. -- ''']''' (]) 20:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
::::It isn't a "standalone summary"; it's a copy of the article itself with some of the details removed. The article is not substantial enough to ''be'' summarized. As several people have already pointed out, the redundant repetitiveness you keep reverting to is '''bad writing''', which they have sought to fix, but you keep standing in their way. Please cut it out. -] (]) 20:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Having a lede of only a few sentences is '''bad writing'''. -- ''']''' (]) 20:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I'm sorry, but that is not the only measure of writing quality. It is not even the most important. "Clunky and amateurish" above was right. Now, are you going to let anyone try to improve this article or not? -] (]) 20:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::If by "try to improve this article" you mean '''''gut the lede''''' to a mere few sentences, then that would be a '''reduction''' in quality. If by "try to improve this article" you mean '''expand''' the rest of the article with good material from ] sources, that would be ''most'' appreciated. ;) -- ''']''' (]) 20:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
{{outdent}}'''Update:''' Please see NOTE: Performing a SELF-REVERT. Drastically reducing the size of the lede, until such time as rest of article is expanded upon further. {{done}}. -- ''']''' (]) 20:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== History section verb use == |
|
== Edit Warning == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The history section is filled with kind of weird verb phrases like "had been watching" and "started thinking." I feel like these sentences don't flow super well. ] (]) 01:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
What's with the edit warning about removing info from the lead? It seems to only serve the purpose of scaring away editors who may have improvements, and I feel it should be removed. ] ] 00:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC) |
|
The history section is filled with kind of weird verb phrases like "had been watching" and "started thinking." I feel like these sentences don't flow super well. Nicfromthethrift (talk) 01:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
