Talk:Shorty Awards

Current and missing information

Looking at this page, to me it seems to be missing lots of information and it just seems like a mess. Through the different years there is categories that are new and some are replaced and there are years with more winners and some with less. By the time is reaches into farther awards ceremonies, this page will just sort of be a list rather than a page about the shorty awards themselves. And like so many other Wikipedia articles about awards like the Grammy Awards, Academy Awards, MTV Video Music Awards, Youtube Music Awards, etc. there is mostly no listing of all the ceremonies and winners. These other articles also include history and what the award is, things about the actual award, not those who are presented it. So seeing many improvements that could be used, here are some suggested:

To do

• History section
  • Include how it was founded and the formation
• Keep descriptions of each award ceremony, but at the same time move the winners and adding those who were nominated to their own page such as the 7th Shorty Awards or 7th Annual Shorty Awards
• Statue, a description about the statue and information about it
• Nomination, such as how people are nominated, process, all the good stuff
• Ceremony, history on where it takes place and possible list of where it has been hosted
• Awards, such a category section of current, discontinued, special, proposed awards
• Ratings, by viewers or companies
• Criticism if there is any
• Pictures of the awards, winners holding it/being presented with it, anything about the above
• Venue where the award ceremony is hosted
• Misc lists of top winners or performances or things about the awards
• More references in order to better back up sources
• See also section to related awards

Thank you - Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 15:17, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Unexplained advert and COI drive-by tagging

Unexplained advert and COI drive-by tagging. [1] [2]

Removed as zero explanation here on the talk page. Sagecandor (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

This would be, frankly, a lie. Nothing in the least unexplained about it; here are the edit summaries:

(:cur | prev) 16:51, 19 July 2017‎ Anmccaff (talk | contribs)‎ . . (76,196 bytes) (+51)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by Sagecandor (talk): Started by spa, promo language, etc. (TW)) (undo)

(cur | prev) 16:46, 19 July 2017‎ Sagecandor (talk | contribs)‎ . . (76,145 bytes) (-51)‎ . . (zero evidence, not explained on talk page) (undo | thank)

(cur | prev) 20:41, 18 July 2017‎ AnomieBOT (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (76,196 bytes) (+30)‎ . . (Dating maintenance tags: {{Advert}} :{{COI}}) (undo)

(cur | prev) 20:20, 18 July 2017‎ Anmccaff (talk | contribs)‎ . . (76,166 bytes) (+20)‎ . . (This would ordinarily look like they hired a publicist to write it. Hey, but they're publicists themselves!!!) (undo)

Most of the edits to this page are by SPAs. Anmccaff (talk) 17:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

This is the first time this disruptive user bothered to explain themselves here on the talk page. And gives zero specifics. Sagecandor (talk) 17:13, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

There is no reason why such a simple, obvious case of COI should be belabored on the talk page, the edit summary works just fine. Anmccaff (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Tags should be explained on talk page, especially when challenged, and not have the talk page ignored in favor of engaging in edit-warring instead. Per WP:BRD, which you disruptively ignored, repeatedly. Sagecandor (talk) 17:33, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Both tags {{COI}} and {{Advert}} should be summarily removed as the disruptive User:Anmccaff has given zero specifics on why they were added in the first place. And given zero evidence about their claims. Sagecandor (talk) 17:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Single-purpose accounds, one sharing a name with the article, writing in glowing terms about the subject suggest COI, strongly. Anmccaff (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

User neglects to give any specifics about what user feels is "glowing terms". User fails to give any specifics about which accounts. User fails to give any individual edits from those accounts. User fails to make any suggestions on what would satisfy user to remove the tags. Sagecandor (talk) 17:32, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Sagecandor --- Anmccaff; Well I think an edit war shouldn't be in order to fix the problem here, and most certainly we shouldn't be calling each other disruptive since its a back and forth; its disruptive enough that both people edit war before talking it out. In this situation, the WP:SPA's in question (Special:Contributions/208.59.112.178 and Special:Contributions/Ianshorty) don't seem to be doing any harm, relatively they're the same person/group since they have the same edit summaries. For the tags, I would think maybe-to-positive that Ianshorty and the IP have an WP:COI with the company/group/awards/whatever, but I don't think they're edits constitute advertising since their edit Special:Diff/779916973/780719726 only creates a section about who won the award, and nothing of the matter about promoting it. Like I said in 2015, the article needs to be redone or recreated since it's a giant mess at the moment, and anything of the sorts of advertising may have been put into the article before those two started contributing. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 19:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Adog104:Thank you for your comments. I'd like to remove the ugly ass tags from the top of the page. We have no specifics from the complainant about how to satisfy them to do so. Barring more specific complaints, I'll go ahead and remove the tags later. Sagecandor (talk) 00:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Sagecandor; maybe just remove the COI since the editor(s) are not active anymore and place Template:Connected contributor on the talk page with those two users if appropriate (since you can't place the template if they're suspected). I think the advertising template might need to stay, however, since like I said the article is a mess and has wording that is questionable, and no doubt needs to be re-done. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 23:19, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Agree with Adog104 about the proposed changes and tag removals. @Adog104:What about the article, specifically, is an "advert" ? How, specifically, can we fix this and remove the tag? Sagecandor (talk) 01:23, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Sagecandor; Sorry about the wait, I find myself that classes take up a lot of time. But enough about [my] shenanigans, the wording of the article–in cases of the lead, body, and boxes–seem to be in advert-esk. For instance...

• In the lead a sentence reads "Greg Galant is CEO and Co-founder and Lee Semel is CTO and Co-founder of Sawhorse Media" which isn't necessary for anything in the article and focuses on other topics instead of the awards.
• Ironically, [Best in Advertising—Peggy Olson, @PeggyOlson] and so on for any boxes with an "@" are in a sense advertising or a directory to individual(s) or entities social media account(s).
• In the first Shorty Awards section sentence-parts like "featured in-person guest appearances by prominent Twitter users" and "owner of the public relations company Big Deal PR in Portland, Oregon" aren't necessary descriptions and read out like an advert.

These are three examples I found, but I'm sure there's a lot more throughout the article. Adog104 ^{Talk to me} 00:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Instead of tagging it with "advert", just modify the language to make it simply factual or to eliminate inapposite info. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:09, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

The main problem with this article is that you wouldn't need all the tables if they were moved to articles for each year's awards, such as the 8th Shorty Awards and 9th Shorty Awards. Then, in this article, each year could just have the summary information in narrative form. I generally agree with Adog's to-do list (to the extent it hasn't been done yet). -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:36, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Long retired sports star wins Best Athlete

How did Billie Jean King win Best Athlete in the 6th Shorty awards? Mobile mundo (talk) 23:24, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Maybe ask that also on Talk:6th Shorty Awards. –84.46.53.51 (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Best in Instagram Story twice in 9th Shorty Awards

Best in Instagram Story has two different winners. I notice that there is no Best in You Tube Story in the 9th Shorty Awards. Is this a typo? Mobile mundo (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Maybe ask that also on Talk:9th Shorty Awards. –84.46.53.51 (talk) 21:40, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Three-tails-bg.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Apparently kept as PD, I inserted it in all Shorty infoboxes without specific fair use poster image. –84.46.53.51 (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Titles

Quick & dirty sanity check

Long style wikilink	Short style	Image
The 1st Annual Shorty Awards	1st Shorty Awards
The 2nd Annual Shorty Awards	2nd Shorty Awards
The 3rd Annual Shorty Awards	3rd Shorty Awards	Fair use poster
The 4th Annual Shorty Awards	4th Shorty Awards
The 5th Annual Shorty Awards	5th Shorty Awards
The 6th Annual Shorty Awards	6th Shorty Awards	Fair use poster
The 7th Annual Shorty Awards	7th Shorty Awards
The 8th Annual Shorty Awards	8th Shorty Awards
The 9th Annual Shorty Awards	9th Shorty Awards
The 10th Annual Shorty Awards	10th Shorty Awards
The 11th Annual Shorty Awards	11th Shorty Awards	WP:CRYSTAL

As of today 10 red links, possible workarounds, add 10 redirects, or move the four long names to short names, or add 4 redirects. The last idea might cause the least disruption. –84.46.53.51 (talk) 21:24, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Resolved

 – First four articles have been moved to the short titles proposed, which agree with MOS:THETITLE and are consistent with other yearly awards pages. -2pou (talk) 19:06, 11 March 2020 (UTC)