Talk:Box Office Entertainment Awards

Should the GMMSF Box-Office Entertainment Awards have subpages for the list of winners of each annual ceremony? 001Jrm (talk) 21:08, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Not just the list of winners, but I'd say if editors want to follow the precedent used for the Academy Awards, that might be worthwhile, i.e. 9th Academy Awards. DonIago (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I'm planning to do! Thanks so much for your response and I appreciate you commenting here :) Have a great day! 001Jrm (talk) 20:24, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

No problem! Glad I could be helpful. :) DonIago (talk) 12:36, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

follow-up: I was actually requesting for a comment in the first place since my previous articles (ex. 2014 GMMSF...Awards) were redirected to its main page (GMMSF...Awards). Naturally, I talked with the editor first through his talk page. Decision: On-hold. I, then, forwarded my concern here, but no one replied. That's when I asked for a comment, and you agreed. It's been 2 weeks since I announced "the good news" to the editor's talk page but he hasn't replied to me yet. Would you mind if you will be the one to examine my articles (2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008) and decide whether to retain or undo the redirection? Thanks so much! 001Jrm (talk) 06:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I hate to be a downer, but given the minimal level of participation here and at the other venues you pursued, I can't support the idea of independent articles at this time. One article with minimal oversight is enough of a concern, creating multiple articles that would likely have less oversight isn't something I can support. If additional editors join this discussion I'll be happy to reconsider. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 12:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry for being so persistent, but I already expanded the article 5x (which is the first and foremost reason of the redirection). Here's how the main page looks like before and after the redirection. You will see its improvement right away. Also, in comparison to your example, the only difference is that mine don't have the nominees (another reason of his redirection is independent notability). Would you please tell me what I should do/add more on its main page (and independent pages if ever)? Thanks! 001Jrm (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate that you put a great deal of work into this, but I feel we need feedback from additional editors one way or another. Until then you're welcome to be bold and make changes, but my recommendation would be that you focus on getting a more clear consensus for the changes. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

NP. What I'm just wanting to know is what makes the pages not notable. I mean, I've seen other (award-related) articles with the same situation as this and they are letting them create the independent pages (by year) despite the lack of information on its main page. I'm just making my edits based on those articles. Again, as long as it's clear to me why they are not accepted, then I will accept the decision fully. In fact, I accepted my mistake on not focusing on its main page, but that was before and I did improve it. Anyway, I guess I'll just have to wait for another editor to comment on this again. (for as long as the rfc tag is there, right?)

...btw, I appreciate your comments on this topic! Thanks so much! :) 001Jrm (talk) 02:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on GMMSF Box-Office Entertainment Awards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140529052551/http://www.mb.com.ph/node/114694 to http://www.mb.com.ph/node/114694#.UOGctazW_-c

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on GMMSF Box-Office Entertainment Awards. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150701165446/http://www.pep.ph/news/33760/this-week-in-photo-news/1/1 to http://www.pep.ph/news/33760/this-week-in-photo-news/1/1#focus

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:39, 6 January 2017 (UTC)