Talk:Golden Raspberry Awards

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zzyzx11 (talk | contribs) at 07:01, 19 January 2011 (moved Talk:Golden Raspberry Awards to Talk:Golden Raspberry Award over redirect: WP:SINGULAR - Article titles are generally singular in form, unless they are ALWAYS in plural). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 07:01, 19 January 2011 by Zzyzx11 (talk | contribs) (moved Talk:Golden Raspberry Awards to Talk:Golden Raspberry Award over redirect: WP:SINGULAR - Article titles are generally singular in form, unless they are ALWAYS in plural)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

The related Category:Worst Actor Golden Raspberry Award winners has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Golden Raspberry Awards article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Film: Awards / Core / American

	Film portal 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 discussion 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.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the Film awards task force.
	This article is on the project's core list.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Awards Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Comedy Mid‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.)

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.

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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manning Bartlett (talk • contribs)

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 WP:LEAD. Cirt (talk) 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. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Please read WP:OWN. - Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:LEAD, 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. -- Cirt (talk) 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. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Having a lede of only a few sentences is bad writing. -- Cirt (talk) 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? -Jason A. Quest (talk) 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 WP:RS sources, that would be most appreciated. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Categories: