Jump to content

Talk:80th Academy Awards

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured list80th Academy Awards is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 6, 2014Featured list candidateNot promoted
January 25, 2016Featured list candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured list

Cancellation?

[edit]

So I have heard that the Oscars might be cancelled because the writers guild rejected the waiver to have them write material for the show? And apparently they aren't allowed to show old movie clips during the ceremony? Is this true and/or credible? - 99.237.9.80 (talk) 04:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is too early to tell. Everything is speculation. Looking over various news articles posted around online, the WGA is claiming those things, but the Academy is also insisting that the ceremony will go on, even if they have to go without a script and film clips, and just present the awards like it was back in the 1920s. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
From what i hear, if the Writers' Strike dosen't end before the awards, they'll push it back till the end of March, and if it isn't over by then, they'll just cancell it.--Snowman Guy (talk) 01:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed

[edit]

"They may still show clips, however, since the waiver only affects the conditions in which they may show clips." - what does this actually mean? -Gohst (talk) 21:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. I was confused myself. Basketball110 03:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The referenced link is pretty unclear on it too:
"As it does each year, the Academy recently requested from the WGA a waiver in connection with any film clips and excerpts from past Oscar telecasts that might be shown on the upcoming Academy Awards telecast. The Academy was informed last night that the Guild would not grant that waiver, stating that to do so would not advance the Guild's goals in its current efforts to achieve a collective bargaining agreement. This decision affects only the conditions under which we may use such material, not our ability to do so."
I think they mean that they can still use film clips, just in a different manner than they used to use them.
38.97.106.165 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Should it read something like this: On December 18, 2007, a waiver granting excerpts of films and previous award ceremonies to be shown was denied by the striking Writers Guild of America. However some material might be used, as the denial only affected the conditions the clips are shown, not the clips themselves. --obviously that will need to be re-worked, but is it better? -Gohst (talk) 00:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably it means they could show film clips, they just couldn't provide scripted introductions. We got a couple of examples of that, with Jon Stewart introducing "rejected ideas" for montages that would have help "pad" the show - clips of scenes seen through binoculars and periscopes; and clips of people sitting up in bed, startled, from nightmares. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Profanity

[edit]

I definitely just heard very clearly the word "Shit" right after the best director was announced. This probably will blow up into a media circus. Should we mention this? --CastAStone//₵₳$↑₳₴₮ʘ№€ 04:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if it does. Just like if someone makes a thing out of Scott Rudin calling his male life-partner "Honey" during the award presentation. Meanwhile, I thought the Oscars were on a 7-second delay. How did the "S-word" get through? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:51, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No vulgarity audible on my tape, nor mouthed by any of the not-winning directors. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Last sentence of Writers' Strike paragraph. Please edit.71.188.171.104 (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a Wikipedia member or anything... but seriously, THIS: Writers strike effects On December 18, 2007, the striking Writers Guild of America, west denied a waiver requested by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences granting excerpts ... by the Screen Actors Guild) was eliminated, and the ceremony proceeded as normal,although many actresses were seen sucking directors' dicks, trying to get into movies.[9]

IS INCREDIBLY rediculois! , thus, I've taken the liberty of Eliminating the entire last sentance. ~AC MacKenzie Scratch that... I can't edit it out... can someone, please? ~ MacKenzie

What's really ridiculous is you spelling the word ridiculous incorrectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.182.129 (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like someone took care of it. Presumably it has no connection to that one producer's final comment. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok! - you're right... I should learn how to spell the word "ridiculous" properly...

It's an incredibly marketable skill for a Sixteen yr. Old going on his 48th hour without Sleep... but really, I even admit, that was horrendus, horendas, Whore-end-ass??? sp? _ Ac. Mack

"Insomnia? I've got a good cure for that. Get plenty of sleep!" -- W. C. Fields Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 01:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VISA commercial?

[edit]

I don't think the commercial described was filmed specifically for the awards. I'm almost certain I've seen it previously. 75.72.163.123 (talk) 04:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I have seen it many times before the awards. I am going to remove it for now, unless somebody can cite a source to prove it. Nick 8 (talk) 06:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Presenters

[edit]

Which segment did Queen Latifah introduce? Or was she not in the show? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the purpose of listing the presenters with what they presented rather than alphabetically. This was also done last year. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
She wasn't in it, that I could find.
Can anyone list the presenter and performers in the order that they presetned or performed? -162.6.241.20 (talk) 17:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Working on it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here you go. Have at it. Presenters in order of appearance:
Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I went in and changed the order of presenters from alphabetic to the actual ceremonial order of presentation. I relied on the above list to do so. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Amy Adams performance in "So Close"?

[edit]

During the performance of "So Close" from Enchanted, there was a woman dressed as Amy Adams in her purple dress from Enchanted dancin' around with a guy dressed as Patrick Dempsey's character from Enchanted. This woman was the subject of FIERCE!! debate in my household as to whether or not it was actually Amy Adams! I said it was NOT, and the few close-ups of her really didn't look like her (and besides, if it WAS her, wouldn't they have been focusing a lot more on her?) Anyway, it was a silly little disagreement, but because I was outnumbered, I wonder if I'm really just going crazy. Anybody else give a damn? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.45.142.14 (talk) 06:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think that was her... as you point out, she would have had much more screen time if it were in fact her. ViccoLizcano (loggedOut) (Hey! Listen!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.23.91.242 (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. In my recent edit to that section, I restored the text about Adams dancing "So Close," not realizing there was any controversy. I had thought it was clear it was she. Feel free to revert fix that up if your doubts are sufficiently strong. I'll try to find a reliable source on that. jhawkinson (talk) 06:36, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, looking at Michael Yada's AMPAS photos, I concur that it appears not to be Adams. Unfortunately the official AMPAS captions don't give a full itemization, but photos from So Close that feature McLaughlin and the dancers don't mention Adams, which is also an indicator. Sorry for the confusion, I've reverted that portion of my edit. jhawkinson (talk) 06:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking into this. Is there a link to the photos you mentioned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.202.15.32 (talk) 19:32, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and no. The high-resolution versions (that make it easier to see) are not publicly available, but smaller versions are on the AMPAS web site: ss087, tt095, and tt096. Hopefully that is sufficiently clear. jhawkinson (talk) 20:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please add this information

[edit]

In the Netherlands the Academy Awards are broad casted by "Film 1" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.222.64.66 (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Ireland by RTE2 as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.42.205.93 (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like they are both in the article now. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

In Memoriam

[edit]

Did anyone catch the actual dates they used for the In Memoriam montage? I know that it said something like "from February 1, 2007, to January 31, 2008" ... or something like that. I did not catch it, but they definitely did have exact dates listed. I think it would be a good detail to add into the In Memoriam section. If anyone can find that out -- or can review a taping of that montage -- that would be appreciated. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I think you're right. I'll be checking my tape. However, just wait for someone to say that that's "original research". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, those dates are as shown. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This is important because the Academy left out Brad Renfro and Roy Scheider. Since Renfro died before Heath Ledger, his omission was certainly an insult. But Scheider, who died on February 10th, may be included in next year's ceremony if he died after those dates you mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.206.219 (talk) 19:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Something has gone way over my head here. What in the world does Brad Renfro have to do with the Academy (AMPAS) or with the Academy Awards? I am lost. I don't believe that the montage is for "any actor / actress / director that died within the past year". I think that it has to do with deceased film personnel / entertainers with a connection to AMPAS ... no? Heath Ledger was (at the very least) an Academy Award nominee and, as such, had a connection to AMPAS. I sincerely do not see the connection that Renfro had with AMPAS. Can anyone weigh in on this? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]
It's unlikely Renfro was a member of the Academy, which would explain his omission. MovieMadness (talk) 21:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a requirement for being listed? And why would he, as an actor, necessarily be "unlikely" to be in the Academy? I saw Dabbs Greer listed. I was pleased about that. But he was a fairly obscure actor. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing was said about needing to be an AMPAS member, and Renfro was definitely not listed among the deceased. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think they have to be AMPAS members (I don't know how many non-American filmmakers are), but Renfro's two dozen films only included two that got any nominations (The Client and Ghost World), and he had few leading roles and no other substantial hits, while Greer's nearly 100 film appearances over 50 years included a substantial role in a popular Best Picture nominee (as the older version of Tom Hanks in The Green Mile). MisfitToys (talk) 00:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No offense against Renfro ... but I am sure that literally hundreds of actors / directors / entertainers die every year. AMPAS can't tribute them all. I think there needs to be some connection to the Academy, however tenuous. This past year, the Academy only "admitted" / invited 115 or so new members ... and only a fraction of that relatively small number would be actors. I can't imagine someone of Renfro's status (whatever that may be) having been offered an Academy membership. To be honest, I never even heard of Renfro until he died. Also, I agree with the Dabbs Greer info. He had a career that lasted decades in film. I am sure that he has some connections with AMPAS and, who knows, may have been a member. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Another footnote. In response to Baseball Bugs. Dabbs Greer wasn't really that "obscure" at all. If I am remembering correctly, he had a big role in the Little House on the Prairie TV show in the 70's (which was very popular back then). Also -- I think? -- he played the minister who married the Brady Bunch parents in the pilot episode. But, this is all probably a generational thing. I can quote you these "non-obscure" facts about the 1970's TV staple shows ... but, at the same time, I never heard of Brad Renfro. There ya go. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Not a generational thing at all. He was in three Superman episodes, at least one of which I probably saw first run. He did films, but I thought of him as primarily a TV actor. And I had never heard of Brad Renfro until I saw it here. Mel Renfro, I've heard of. There's my "generational thing". And in case I didn't make it clear, I was quite pleased to see Dabbs Greer mentioned last night. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Here is the Academy's official reason, through an official spokesperson, about why Renfro was omitted ... See the following link. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:32, 26 February 2008 (UTC)) http://oscars.movies.yahoo.com/news/associatedpress/20080225/1723.html;_ylt=AsrLh.QLpW4gknREmfkBCVmXVLcF. [1][reply]
Or, for those who don't feel like clicking on it: (1) you don't have to be an Academy member; (2) they can't include everyone; hence, (3) plain and simply, he hadn't done enough notable work to qualify, in their opinion. Seems to me like they could have included February's deaths, including Roy Scheider. When they do him next time, he will have been dead for over a year. So it goes. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If they had time to include Jean-Claude Brialy and Jean-Pierre Cassel, why not their equally prolific/respected/beloved (pick one) countryman Michel Serrault? Are agents included in the membership of AMPAS? I believe that is not relevant to inclusion in the tribute. And speaking of agents and "executives," and echoing comments from above, I'll bet most of the viewing audience found the mentions of Frank Rosenfelt and Robert Lantz beyond obscure (worthy or not). By the way, I believe you have misspelled Michelangelo Antonioni's first name.76.175.192.147 (talk) 12:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mis-spell it, but I fixed it. Given there's a link for the mis-spelling, it's apparently a common problem. As far as the obscure ones, they probably want a mix of talents, not just the well-known actors and directors. Including agents seems a bit much. But it's their show, and from the ratings, apparently only the contributors to this page were actually watching it. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, I think the mini-uproar is rather silly; the tribute omitted a number of actors (all well-liked in the entertainment industry) with much more substantial careers than Renfro who - although they worked more in television or theater - did have a number of notable film credits, including George Grizzard, Alice Ghostley, Tom Poston (whose wife Suzanne Pleshette also didn't have a lengthy film career but was included), Ian Richardson, etc., as well as some character actors like Charles Lane and non-actors like cinematographer Alex Thomson. MisfitToys (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC).[reply]
They have to keep the necrology brief. Otherwise the show might run long. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Otherwise, the show might run long." LOL. Was that sarcasm? (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

"Advertisements" section

[edit]

Does it really add anything new? I vote it gets whacked (i.e., deleted). --zenazn 23:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Super Bowl is known for introducing new ads, so they merit mention there. I don't know that Oscar is known for that, although someone else could maybe speak up here. If not, though, then delete. "Whack" works too. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think some new ads are released but hasn't that happened for years? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.51.85.26 (talk) 03:06, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New ads are released all the time. The difference is that they make a big deal out of new ads in the Super Bowl and they are easily sourced. "I think it's the first time I've seen it" doesn't qualify as a source. If someone at CNN writes about it, that's different, of course. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this section should be removed. There is no proof advertisers released new, specific commercials for the broadcast or the so-called "product placements" were intentional. And how could anyone know the Nintendo Wii game Wii Tennis was displayed on stage during a commercial break unless he was in the theater? MovieMadness (talk) 17:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Presenters table

[edit]

I think a table like the 78th Academy Awards#Academy Award ceremony presenters and performers is a much better method to organize the performers and presenters.138.23.55.162 (talk) 10:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which presenters tripped up or slipped? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.113.176 (talk) 12:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there were any serious gaffes this year by the presenters. The biggest mistake was probably that one award recipient being cut off by the orchestra, and they brought her back after the commercial, and frankly she went on a bit too long, so they might have had the right idea in the first place. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 12:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think it makes more sense to have this Table in chrono order, rather than alpha. No? (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Well, I certainly think so. And I gave the order, in an earlier section. Someone can do the work if they're willing. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 15:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]
In answer to "Which presenters tripped up or slipped?," Cameron Diaz stumbled on her pronunciation of "cinematography," and both Tom Hanks and Colin Farrell literally slipped on a sleek patch of floor as they approached the podium (and I realize that was not what you meant!). MovieMadness (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, she had a little trouble saying "cinematography", which I can't fault her for as it's difficult enough to touch-type. Slipping on the floor would be reminiscent of Jennifer Garner's near-fall last year, so that fits. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 17:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Writers guild strike

[edit]

I feel there should be a short sentence in the introduction paragraph. Most people didn't know if it was going to happen at all or at the very least what the 80th awards ceremony was going to be like due to the Writers guild strike. I feel that the timing of the guild strike was notable pertaining to the Oscar awards, and part of what made this awards ceremony different and memorable from the ones from the past. It was notable.--Sparkygravity (talk) 17:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technical Achievement Awards missing.

[edit]

Every Year there is a ceremony prior to the film awards to present the technical achievement awards. I see no mention of these awards here. This is a HUGE oversight (IMO). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.167.159.19 (talk) 19:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For those interested in working on this, you might begin with the IMDb material from this point to the end of the page, particularly noting the Gordon E. Sawyer Award and Academy Award for Technical Achievement. MisfitToys (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "Oscars"

[edit]

Shouldn't there be some mention of the fact that they're also called the Oscars? --zenazn 20:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At some point, yes. If no one else does, I will try to squeeze this in somewhere appropriate. But, you make a good point. It should be mentioned in there at least once. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
I went ahead and did it. Someone more adept at Wikipedian maneuvering can pretty it up if they like. --zenazn 21:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added the following sentence: "During the ceremony, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences presented Academy Awards (commonly referred to as Oscars) in 24 categories." It had some basic info, which needed to be stated at least once in the article. And, it killed 3 birds with 1 stone: that the awards are given by AMPAS, that they are called "Oscars", and that there were 24 categories. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:43, 5 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Roderick Jaynes?

[edit]

If Roderick Jaynes is actually a pen name for the Coen Brothers in Film Editing, then who is the guy in the picture they showed for No Country For Old Men during the nominee overview for Film Editing?--Snowman Guy (talk) 16:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great question! Per: http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20007870_20164474_20180773_4,00.html [2] ... "Question: It's an open secret that the Coen brothers edit their own movies, but under the pseudonym Roderick Jaynes. Who, then, was the bespectacled old coot in the photo shown during the rundown of the Achievement in Film Editing nominees? Answer: A Dust Bowl-era farmer the wily Coens found in a book. The brothers are so committed to the ruse that if Jaynes had won this category, they would not have accepted on his behalf." Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Thanks for the info. I also have a few more questions that wern't answered in the cited website;

1. When Robert Elswit accepted the Best Cinematography Oscar for There Will Be Blood he said that Daniel Day Lewis was not there, However, Day Lewis later came to the stage to accept Best Actor for There Will Be Blood. Why is that?

2. Was presenter John Travolta actually a dancer in the performance of So Close?

3. In the opening segment (which shows various movie characters in Hollywood) before Arnold pulls up his truck at the Kodak Theatre, i noticed someone who may have been George Clooney or Host Jon Stewart walking by, Was it one of them?

4. How did Barry B. Benson present the Best Animated Short Award without the winner being announced before hand?


Is anyone sure of the answers?--Snowman Guy (talk) 00:36, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for question #5, the sequence was animated with the envelope in front of Barry's mouth as he reads the name of the winner, with Jerry Seinfeld reading the winner's name offstage. The rest of the presentation could be pre-recorded to match the visuals. (This has been done a few times for the Oscars.) MisfitToys (talk) 01:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It was somewhat similarly done with the US forces in Iraq who (supposedly) read the name of the winner for Best Documentary Short. It was filmed ahead of time, with all nominees announced as "the winner", and the "correct" video was run at the ceremony. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Major winner tables

[edit]

I think all Academy Award articles should have their "major winner tables" reformatted like the one in this article. I already had fixed it for the 75th and 76th Academy Awards' articles.Birdienest81 (talk) 19:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I did that reformatting. I am curious why you made the above post ... why did you want all the others reformatted in the way that I reformatted this one? I am just curious. I assume that you like my formatting better --- but, what specifically is it that you prefer? Thanks. Please let me know. Thanks. If you can, please reply at My Talk Page. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

"Many" blame ... "Many" believe

[edit]

"Many insiders and critics blame the extremely low ratings and shrunken audience size to the fact that, like the awards telecast of two-years earlier, no box office hits were nominated. Many believe that the ratings for the awards heavily depend on what films receive the nominations."

The above text seems weaselly to me -- anyone else? 67.49.8.228 (talk) 07:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC) User:Pedant[reply]

There´s some vandalism, in the category best actor and best picture... I don´t know how to undo it, without doing some add. damage... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.65.141.129 (talk) 09:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Memorable quotes

[edit]

Academy Awards vs. Oscars

[edit]

Why are the Academy Awards also referred to as the Oscars? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.214.28.214 (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Academy Awards which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:14, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 80th Academy 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:

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) 11:10, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:80th_Academy_Awards&oldid=1217535569"