Talk:Movie Critters' Big Picture

This page was proposed for deletion by Tooncool64 (talk · contribs) on 1 February 2024.

	Film portal This redirect 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 American cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Animated films task force.
	This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.
	This article needs an appropriate infobox template.

Animation

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles

Thanks

Hello @Cunard:, thanks for backing the claim of the awards with a source. That's so useful. I actually thought about leaving you a note about this page, thinking you would be able to find something!!!! Thank you so much.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Mushy Yank (talk · contribs)! I'm glad I was able to find a source for this. Cunard (talk) 10:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

@Cunard: @Rosguill: Rosguill has re-added the notability tag stating "as written, not clear that the cited awards are noteworthy, as they lack Wikipedia articles and coverage online appears to be purely PR and self-promotion". I really wonder how the 2 articles used as sources could be self-promotion but maybe that was not what was meant (and rather that the rest of existing online coverage was PR)....but as the sources found seemed insufficient,I will therefore reinstate the redirect I had made when deProdding the page (and add the sources there). If other users disagree with that or/and find sources, feel free to revert. Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to coverage of the Telly awards available online, e.g. [1], [2], [3]. Meanwhile, while there's a lot of coverage of Dove music awards (e.g. [4]), I'm not seeing similar coverage of a film or television Dove award. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK, my bad, understood. Thanks for clarifying. Anyway feel free to revert my redirect if you think it's not suitable for the time being. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill. The FAB seal of Excellence (see source added by Cunard) does not have a WP article but it has a section.... -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section in question seems to mostly throw shade at the validity of the award, The Film Advisory Board has come under criticism as of late with the seemingly wide use of the FAB Seal of Excellence, with critics stating that while the seal denotes family-friendly entertainment, it does not always denote quality..."We're not critics. Critics are people who say the 'yay' or the 'nay'. We don’t do that. "If we can't say something good about a film, we don’t give them an award" _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill. I respectfully disagree with what you do of that quote, that I was absolutely certain you would make and in that spirit (smile). Allow me to requote the very same:. "The Film Advisory Board has come under criticism as of late with the seemingly wide use of the FAB Seal of Excellence, with critics stating that while the seal denotes family-friendly entertainment, it does not always denote quality..."We're not critics. Critics are people who say the 'yay' or the 'nay'. We don’t do that. If we can't say something good about a film, we don’t give them an award".(Emphasis mine) We are not critics ourselves (at least not here) and quality is not the issue. Is the award significant or not, is the question. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:05, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And as for the Dove Seal, and since your initial statement for re-adding the notability tag was they lack Wikipedia articles, let's have a look at the Dove WP article while we're at it.

The first section goes: "Although its programs are diversified, it is perhaps best known for reviewing movies for suitability for family viewing, and endorsing acceptable ones with the Dove "Family-Approved" Seal. "-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By stating that they are not critics, they disqualify themselves as RS for these matters, and the external criticism of their awards is also reason for pause. By contrast, there's publications like Commonsense media that provide both critical assessments and family-friendliness assessments. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Such is at least your personal assessment. I beg to differ. Are all significant film awards given by film critics and by film critics only? I also emphasised various qualifications concerning that external criticism and the statement by the FAB can also be read as a mark of humility. But hey. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are all significant film awards given by film critics and by film critics only? Yeah, pretty much.

I also emphasised various qualifications you seem to be mistaking Wikipedia editorialism for actual information about the topic. The cited source says this It seems that no one else has much nice to say about this putridly-reviewed Christmas movie, so Gelf called up Stokes to see what she liked about the movie (and to ask her why we weren't able to find the rest of her review anywhere). As it turns out, the Film Advisory Board doesnâ€™t review movies per se, it just determines which ones are suitable for children. "We're not critics," Stokes says. "Critics are people who say the 'yay' or the 'nay'. We donâ€™t do that. If we can't say something good about a film, we donâ€™t give them an award." For certain movies that the Board is invited to prescreen and decides to bestow its award upon, Stokes will submit a positive blurb to the film's publicity team, as in the case of 'Deck the Halls.' Complicating this relationship, though, is that the Film Advisory Board relies on donations from the movie studios to stay in business. Stokes maintains that the funding plays no role in deciding which movies to grant awards or blurbs. [5].

I'd hold that in this discussion you're being far too credible of primary sources and/or unreferenced information as regards sources' reliability. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you say so. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding The Dove Foundation, I'm not seeing any cited sources to secondary coverage discussing their awards, just primary ones [6], [7]. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're the one who mentioned the lack of WP article(s) in the first place, not me. Now if you want to remove (or add a cn tplt to) the bit I am quoting, because it does not support your argument (and obviously, and most importantly, because it's unsourced (smile)), feel free. I'll leave it at that.The page has been redirected to comply with your personal objections, so the issue can be considered resolved anyway. Thank you for your time. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]