This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Can this page please be semi-protected? -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 02:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've semi-protected it, since this article seems to be a vandalism magnet. All the editing that's needed is to put the winners in boldface, and it seems like established users are doing that well enough. TheCoffee 02:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected now. TheCoffee 01:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boldface is a poor way to mark the winners, it is not half as clear as writing the words. Writing words rather than relying only on style to convey meaning would be better more encyclopedic writing style. My edit - adding the word "winners" where appropriate - made the page clearer for those with poor vision and perhaps also those using screen reading software. Alternatively using more words, possibly even sentences would be in better keeping with the goals of an encyclopedia rather than the current list of data. Relying only on style (first and formest) and (to add to the mistake) the haste and lack of consideration with which my change was removed further reinforces my disillusionment with Wikipedia. This page is far from what it could be and locking the page would be premature. -- Horkana 22:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So now we're putting the winners first in their categories? Then what's the point of alphabetical order? In no other years have we done this.Supertigerman 02:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try and keep things consistent with previous years Trieste 03:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think rather than having list we must switch to Tables with different background. Just as it is on 79th Academy Awards. It's more legible. The list seems too messy. Vivek 05:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

agreed. What kind of table? Supertigerman 01:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can follow the format of the tables on the 79th Academy Awards page. Matt 06:47, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Oscar Statuette (79th Academy Awards).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]