Talk:2008 Australian Film Institute Awards

	Australia portal 2008 Australian Film Institute Awards is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australian cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Film: Australian / Awards

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the Australian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Film awards task force.

Awards Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, 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.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Years Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years 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.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested 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.

The result of the move request was: Move. I had moved them by year to avoid any further mistakes, and have fixed Template:Australian Film Institute Awards. Kilo T 21:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

51st Australian Film Institute Awards → 52nd Australian Film Institute Awards — Relisted Alpha Quadrant ^talk 21:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC) [reply]

It was previously listed on Wikipedia that the first awards were presented in 1959 when they were really presented in 1958. Therefore the ordinal numbers for each year are incorrect. Sources:

Shining a Light: 50 Years of the Australian Film Institute. Australian Teachers of Media. 2009. ISBN 1876467207.
"IMDb Australian Film Institute Awards". The Internet Movie Database. Retrieved 2011-01-19. DonEd (talk) 06:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

50th Australian Film Institute Awards → 51st Australian Film Institute Awards
49th Australian Film Institute Awards → 50th Australian Film Institute Awards
48th Australian Film Institute Awards → 49th Australian Film Institute Awards
Support per nom. Jenks24 (talk) 03:44, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we title them by year?--Kotniski (talk) 11:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- An equally valid suggestion. Personally I think either way would be fine. Jenks24 (talk) 12:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's just that we seem to know for sure which years they took place in, but there seems to be some doubt (and a need for original research) about the ordinal numbers. This makes me think they aren't usually referred to by their ordinal numbers, so using the years will be both more meaningful to readers and less open to doubt.--Kotniski (talk) 14:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Using the year would probably be a better option. By the way, this article talks about the award ceremony of 2009, but the template links here from 2008. Whichever the new title of these pages, someone will have to go through any links pointing here and see if they refer to the correct year's article. Jafeluv (talk) 11:19, 3 June 2011 (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.