Talk:Podcast Awards: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 85.211.152.27 - "" |
Tag: |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{oldafdfull| |
{{oldafdfull|date=26 August 2009 (UTC)|result='''keep'''|page=Podcast Awards}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| |
|||
{{WikiProject Podcasting| |
{{WikiProject Podcasting|importance=Top}} |
||
{{WikiProject Awards|importance=Low}} |
|||
}} |
|||
== Articles about the Podcast Awards from Newspapers, Magazines? == |
== Articles about the Podcast Awards from Newspapers, Magazines? == |
||
| Line 29: | Line 31: | ||
==Criticism== |
==Criticism== |
||
the criticism section seems quite unjust, and doesn't have any references. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.211.152.27|85.211.152.27]] ([[User talk:85.211.152.27|talk]]) 13:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
the criticism section seems quite unjust, and doesn't have any references. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.211.152.27|85.211.152.27]] ([[User talk:85.211.152.27|talk]]) 13:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
==Why no controversy?== |
|||
There have been multiple instances of rule flip-flopping, public drama (ala Twitter), and clear bias on the part of Todd. To present this as an entirely professional institution as the article does is very disengenuous. |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/199.66.66.136|199.66.66.136]] ([[User talk:199.66.66.136|talk]]) 18:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC) |
|||
:If you have sourced reports, feel free to add such a section. It is common for awards articles. It looks like there used to be a criticism section once, before it was removed, disguised as an edit only adding 12th awards info here: [[Special:Diff/788459669]]. I will restore this section since it was sourced. Feel free to add to it (with sources) as you see fit. -[[User:2pou|2pou]] ([[User talk:2pou|talk]]) 03:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 08:08, 20 February 2024
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 26 August 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Articles about the Podcast Awards from Newspapers, Magazines?
Are there any articles about the awards in Newspapers or Magazines?Kevin Crossman 17:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I have tried to add some references to reliable sources such as these. Anonymous101 (talk) 16:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Sponsors
How is listing the history of all of the sponsor irrelevant? Isn't this the main source of how the podcast all came to be?--71.88.106.67 (talk) 09:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
- 1) Why would people want to know who sponsored the event?
- 2) Does, let's say, MTV Video Music Awards contain a list of sponsors? No.
- 3) Does CBS contain a list of which companies advertise on their television network? No. --Pdedecker (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Other Podcast Awards
There is also something like an European Podcast Award Should it be mentioned here, does it deserve a page for itself?--Popopp (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Scam
The podcast awards are a scam to drive traffic to the website and get ad revenue. Le Douche? But of course! (talk) 19:39, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Grammer
This article has more gramatical errors than a bad podcast.TheTribeHasSpoken (talk) 03:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
- Grammatical. User: Anon 14:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Criticism
the criticism section seems quite unjust, and doesn't have any references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.152.27 (talk) 13:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Why no controversy?
There have been multiple instances of rule flip-flopping, public drama (ala Twitter), and clear bias on the part of Todd. To present this as an entirely professional institution as the article does is very disengenuous. 199.66.66.136 (talk) 18:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- If you have sourced reports, feel free to add such a section. It is common for awards articles. It looks like there used to be a criticism section once, before it was removed, disguised as an edit only adding 12th awards info here: Special:Diff/788459669. I will restore this section since it was sourced. Feel free to add to it (with sources) as you see fit. -2pou (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)