Talk:Academy Award for Best Director

message: I have found in the individual award ceremony articles various names for this award and I have been copying them in the years in film articles. This article suggests there has been only this name (Award for Directing) from the 1920s to the present. In the 74th Academy Awards "Achievement in directing" and in 31st Academy Awards "Best Director" is found. Is this not the main award? Was the name different during this year? Can this be made clear in the article? I could then go ahead and make all the corrections through the years in film. Hoverfish 09:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Award /Achievement for Directing /Best Director 

message: Last time I checked this is the Oscars not the Olympics.
Is it really necessary? It looks confusing with flags all over the place as oppose to just having simply their names and films. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.215.61 (talk) 12:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's Up With The Flags??? 

message: Up to and including 1959, the names of the unsuccesful nominees for Best Director are ordered according to their surnames. From 1960, they're ordered according to the title of the movie.  Is there any good reason for this inconsistency?  The award is for direction, so these should all be ordered by the name of the director, not the title of the movie.  I'd argue the opposite should apply for Best Picture.  JackofOz 03:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Order inconsistency

message: I recently noticed on this page that Bob Fosse was listed as Best Director in 1972.  If you check IMDB, Francis Ford Coppola won this award.  Someone might want to give this page a thorough accuracy check, using the IMDB as a reference.  Thank you.
16 April 2007
: For 1972, Fosse won Best Director.  Coppola was nominated for Best Director, but lost.  Coppola did win Best Writing / Best Screenplay, however. (JosephASpadaro 08:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Check for accuracy 

message: Is there any particular reason for which the name of this article is "Academy Award for Directing" ... as opposed to "Academy Award for Best Director" ...?  The latter is more consistent with all of the other Academy Award articles (Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress, etc.).  Any thoughts on changing the name of this article to "Academy Award for Best Director" ...?  Thanks.  (JosephASpadaro 00:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Academy officially calls the award by that name, that's why. Cop 663 01:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed.  But it is still inconsistent with all of the other articles.  In other words, all of the other articles do not go by what the Academy officially calls the awards.  (JosephASpadaro 04:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I see what you mean. Well, personally, I think the article title should be the award's official name. So this article should be called Academy Award for Achievement in Directing and Academy Award for Best Actor should be retitled Academy Award for Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role. But I could be alone in this, what do you think? Cop 663 12:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that the article titles probably should be the same as the award's official name.  At this point, however, I see two problems with that.  (1)  That would involve making a lot of title changes to a lot of articles ... as opposed to just changing one title (for Best Director).  (2)  I also think that most people using the encyclopedia would search under the commonly known titles (e.g., Best Actor) as opposed to the "official" Academy title (Academy Award for Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role) -- due to this, I think the commonly known titles are more user-friendly.  (JosephASpadaro 21:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, and some of the official titles are a bit unwieldy. And Use common names is a naming convention. So if you want to change it to 'Best Director' I for one won't object! Cop 663 02:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the input.  I will wait a bit and see if any one else weighs in on this issue.  If not, I will change the title.  Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 21:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Pursuant to the above discussion, I have changed the title of this article from "Academy Award for Directing" to "Academy Award for Best Director".  The new title is more consistent with all of the other Academy Award article titles (e.g., Academy Award for Best Picture, Academy Award for Best Actor, Academy Award for Best Actress, etc.).  Thanks.  (Joseph A. Spadaro 17:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of This Article

message: You list 6 ppl as nominated for both director & actor: Allen, Costoner, Eastwood, Beatty, Olivier & Benigni. First, it should be noted that Beatty did it twice, and got nothing for Heaven Can Wait. Also, Orson Welles was nominated for both for Citizen Kane and lost both awards.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.123.140.164 (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What you say is true.  Orson Welles was nominated for both Best Director and Best Actor for Citizen Kane in 1941 ... and he lost both.  Warren Beatty was nominated for both Best Director and Best Actor for Heaven Can Wait in 1978 ... and he lost both.  I think that the section of this article that you are referring to is merely detailing those occasions where the double-nominee (in Best Director and Best Actor categories) actually won at least one of the awards ... seeing as how no one has yet won both awards.  I would have to double check, but I would imagine that there are other instances (besides the Welles and Beatty examples that you cite) in which a double nomination occurred in Director / Actor categories.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Although I have no source to verify it, I've ran through the list of directors again and the only other director I can find who was ever nominated for an acting award was John Huston. Though, he was nominated as an actor for a movie he didn't direct. Olivier two other times directed himself to an acting nomination (Richard III, and his long-titled adaptation of Henry V), but he didn't receive direction nods for those. To cover the last obvious base, Chaplin never received a direction nomination.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.123.140.169 (talk) 04:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, what you are saying is that the article -- as it now stands -- is correct and needs no editing ... right?  That is, the article is correct in stating that those six people (Allen, Costner, Eastwood, Beatty, Olivier, and Benigni) are the only ones ever to be nominated as both Best Director and Best Actor for the same film ... and to win at least one of these nominations.  All of the other instances that you cite do not fit these criteria, as you yourself acknowledge.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article says "Six people have been nominated for both Best Director and Best Actor for the same film, but none has won both." That's incorrect. 7 people have been nominated for both, your 6 + Orson.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.123.140.169 (talk) 05:40, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, you are right ... now I see what you mean.  I went in and edited the article.  Let me know if it looks OK now or if there is still some error.  Thanks.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looks great.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.121.45 (talk) 08:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Great catch, by the way.  Thanks!  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Also true.  I added that into the article.  Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 08:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Academy Award for Best Director|Best Director]] and [[Academy Award for Best Actor|Best Actor]] Awards 

message: Hitchcock did not win Best Director for Psycho, although perhaps he deserved to.  The winner was Wilder for The Apt.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin324la (talk • contribs) 02:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  Why are you saying this?  I just checked the article, and it mirrors what you state here.  If indeed there was an error / vandalism, it has since been fixed.  Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 09:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, one editor made a whole series of vandalism edits.  I just fixed them all.  Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 09:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I just made an edit that might resolve the problem.  The sentence about being the only director to be nominated for first 2 films didn't really belong in that para as it was a unique feat.  It focusses on the fact that he was nominated twice in a row (whether he won or not), not on the fact that they were both unsuccessful.  --  JackofOz (talk) 00:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, although I still think his name doesn't belong on that list (if he merits an inclusion there, then we should consider including dozens of others), it does make for better phrasing. Let's see what other people think about the "citation needed" tag. Cheers. JimboB (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for coming back on the subject, but, as the latest editor accurately pointed out, not even the claim that Stephen Daldry was the only director nominated for both his first and second feature films was correct (first time around, I didn't bother checking that out, I assumed whoever added that to the article knew what he/she was saying). Again, it makes me think some fan of his really wanted his name on this article and pushed it. Well... may I remove him from that list? I'm asking here first to see if anyone has a problem with that, but I strongly recommend anyone who bothers to answer to just click on each name on that list and see for yourselves in the mere summary of each article the discrepancy between Daldry and the rest in terms of general recognition as a filmmaker (not to mention the fact that he only has two feature films to his name). If no one opposes, I'll remove his name in a few days. I also intend to remove the "citation needed" tag at the article's opening paragraph. You can check all the other articles concerning Oscar awards and see for yourselves that this is the only one carrying the tag (reason being, it's common knowledge who chooses the Oscar winners in every category). Cheers. JimboB (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 23:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, no one complained. Done then. JimboB (talk) 23:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hitch 

message: The first is Chaplin up for directing The Circus. Chaplin was initially nominated for direction & acting, but his nominations were rescinded in order to give him an honorary award. So, he was never officially nominated for directing The Circus. The second is in your "multiple nominations" category, you list Joel & Ethan Coen as having 2 nominations, but Ethan Coen was not nominated for directing Fargo, only Joel was. 67.162.137.3 (talk) 19:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two flaws 

message: *I don't think any of the LBGT who won were open @ the time, were they? How about nom'd? --208.38.59.163 (talk) 22:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Openly gay 

message: 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 13:17, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Academy Award for Best Directing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120113073946/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/statistics/bestpixdirdiff.html to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/statistics/bestpixdirdiff.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:29, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Academy Award for Best Director. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://theenvelope.latimes.com/awards/oscars/env-oscarvote7jan07%2C0%2C6919642%2Cprint.story?coll=env-home-headlines
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090301005626/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080913120840/http://www.oscars.org/awardsdatabase/index.html to http://www.oscars.org/awardsdatabase/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Academy Award for Best Director. 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://archive.is/20120905/http://www.oscars.org/awards/academyawards/legacy/ceremony/55th-winners.html to http://www.oscars.org/oscars/ceremonies/1983
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:51, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Just wondered why in the diversity section of the article M Night Shyamalan is singled out as Indian, rather than with the other Asian directors. India is part of Asia, no?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muinimula (talk • contribs) 11:27, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diversity - Indian/Asian 

message: I made two edits in the list of Female Nominees, both for consistency with other lists and to remove political/judgmental inferences.
The list started with "Just five female directors . . ." (italics mine), whereas the other lists started with "Five Asian directors . . . ", "Six black directors . . .", "Five Latin American directors . . .", and so on. (Notice absence of opening "Just".) While the dearth of female nominees may be regrettable in the minds of many (or even most), the political/judgmental inference by use of the word "Just" is inappropriate for a factual reference. In addition, it's inconsistent with the terminology used in the other lists. If there is a relatively small number of nominees in some classification, then either all should be "just <number>" or none of them should be. 
Similarly, for the female nominees, the original stated that "one was given the award", whereas for all the other groups the phrasing was "<number> has (have) won the award". (Again, italics mine) The phrase "was given" is condescending in that it suggests that the award was made gratuitously rather than on merit.
66.165.12.108 (talk) 17:33, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Female Nominees 

message: It is probably a good idea to identify the winners by nationality.  The academy awards are technically not international awards, but they're the de facto "nobel prizes" of film, and for those kinds of international awards it's customary to associate winners with their country of origin.  Perhaps this can be done via a "by nationality" table in the diversity section or a new section, or add country names/flag icons next to each director's name in the main list.  Currently there is the "non English films" list, but that misses 1. Foreign directors of English-language films, and 2. directors from the UK and Canada (for some reason Oceania is already covered in separate section, which I think should be deleted). Topotrivl (talk) 18:28, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality of winners 

message: has reported an edit filter false positive that, while indeed a false positive, can't be added in its current form due to WP:BLP. It seems like this would be a valid addition to this article if sourced; I may get around to sourcing it myself, but if not, I offer it for anyone else interested: Special:AbuseLog/31481703.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 22:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit filter false positive that would need sourcing to add 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* Warren Beatty - 1975.JPG
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:15, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: There are several directors in the "Multiple nominations" section with an asterisk by their name, but no explanation of what that signifies. What is it? 2600:8801:13AA:DA00:ACE1:4A35:87B5:FEDB (talk) 00:30, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed it. The original peer reviewed article didn't include them, so they were added by someone else at some point. (CC) Tbhotch™ 20:18, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asterisks in "Multiple nominations" section 

message: The article has grown some extra features since 2016 when it was listed as a Featured Article. Some of these features do not meet FA criteria, for instance the violations of WP:SYNTH represented in the notations using dagger, et cetera (§ † ‡ ), in the extensive stack of flags violating MOS:FLAG (these people are not representing their countries officially), and in the unreferenced sections about diversity and records. Will someone remove the various violations, or should we start the process of delisting the FA status? Binksternet (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slipped standards, no longer meeting FA criteria 

message: In accordance with the 4 acting Oscar pages, I thought perhaps for consistency, it would look good if the captions maintained the same standard flow to them. We've been refining them a bit to simplify the text.
For ex:
*"Name Name won for Movie (1900)."
*"Name Name won twice, for Movie (1900) & Other Film (1907)."
And if there's a significant superlative, which was tough for me to reduce at times--started to, then backpedaled, but back on track!--Such as "First black actress to win" or "Oldest winning actor", etc., and I notice that was pretty much what was done on here too. Wikilink to those superlative pages in the captions for further reading.
What was great over there was, realizing if we move all of the image links to the top above the "winner key", the way in which all of the images cascade down the right side flows cleanly without any big white gaps, or without the end set of faces overlapping into the bottom section. It looks a lot cleaner that way. It flows really well, occasionally the pics will be ahead or behind the table--it's not perfect, but they catch up eventually. And if that's an issue, let's discuss that? I was originally hoping when I was gonna give this a try today that it would allow for the pics to remain 145px. So that was the downside!
But on the plus size, minus the disappointment of having to omit Schlesinger and Richardson from the list, the great part here w/ many repeat winners, is by reducing size, we can include just about every Director nominee with a free license picture. That's great, I think.
The other good thing is that, on mobile, I believe if someone wants to scroll past the pictures and get right to the decades' tables, it should be collapsable within the winners&nominees tab? My cell is dead right now....If not, could a subsection help alleviate that?
I noticed that many had square pics anyway, older directors. Then newer ones were more vertically rectangular. So I hope no one minds, but I did crop almost all of them to make them relatively evenly squared. The exceptions were the Coens, who share that pic, the Wilder pic, and the Hazanavicius pic, which helped with spacing being horizontal.
The ampersand usage, a moderator told me on the acting pages yesterday, meets complete Wikipedia standards approval via MOS:&, and that goes for the infobox too, if I'm not mistaken. I think it's essential in preventing captions from being too long.
So there wasn't much disagreement on the acting pages, or pushback. Hopefully this will be received positively here, but I can understand it's jarring. I'm not thrilled with the wording for Borzage and Milestone, but I was afraid of being any wordier with them lol. However, if someone could phrase it a little better but still succinctly, please help. The template for the actors was "inaugural winner" for such and such film--but thanks to them winning a second one each normally, well that screws that pooch....
Okay. My loquacious self has anxiously rambled enough....Hope that what I hope are improvements are received well, but if not, I was hoping maybe we can discuss it at least.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 04:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sidebar excess whitespace (desktop/laptop browser view) & imagebox captions.