Talk:UK Adult Film and Television Awards

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on UK Adult Film and Television 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 https://web.archive.org/20080927185837/http://www.ukafta.com:80/award.php?id=2 to http://www.ukafta.com/award.php?id=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080425044923/http://www.ukafta.com:80/? to http://www.ukafta.com

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 01:01, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on UK Adult Film and Television 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 https://web.archive.org/20080212030942/http://www.channel4.com:80/news/articles/arts_entertainment/piper+drama+up+for+adult+film+award/1071447 to http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/arts_entertainment/piper+drama+up+for+adult+film+award/1071447

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 08:44, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Current awards

The awards actually still exist as I could now find out. They are called UKAP awards, organized by UK Adult Producers: As of 2016 they say "It's the UKAP Awards 10th year" And here they say that the UKAFT Awards were their first awards in 2006. Back then UKAP didn't fully admit these awards, but the organizers were members from UKAP acting against the majority from UKAP. Nowadays they clearly state "look back on UKAP Awards when we started out as UKAFTA". So, the page should be moved to "UKAP Awards". --SamWinchester000 (talk) 09:35, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

In their Award History they state that again in 2017: "The UKAP Awards was previously known as UKAFTA and 2017 will be our 12th year". --SamWinchester000 (talk) 00:21, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Recent edit

I trimmed the article leaving the material that can reliably cited to secondary sources, rather than the award itself diff. Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:23, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Obviously, there's nothing wrong with using the awarding organization (the organization that gave the awards out in the first place) as a reliable source for who won which awards. Who better would know who won which award than the award organization itself? One's opinion on whether or not the awards in question are "significant" is meaningless. I'll be likely reverting momentarily. Guy1890 (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Done. I'd also like to know where you think that you're getting the authority to remove what (in apparently your own opinion) is "Intricate detail" from this and many, many other Wikipedia articles as well as established & reliable citations and/or sourced material. Please stop doing this. Guy1890 (talk) 00:10, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

@Guy1890: This award, per recent AfDs, is not considered "well known and significant". Thus, including everyone who won this non-notable award falls under WP:INDISCRIMINATE, with the article itself becoming a WP:DIRECTORY of said non notable performers. We don't include winners of every local Spelling Bee competitions in the encyclopedia, do we? K.e.coffman (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Again, your personal opinion of this award ceremony is meaningless, and it isn't "non-notable", since "well known and significant" is a higher standard than whether something is notable or not. Your recent attempts to gut more than three-quarters of this article's reliably-sourced content aren't going anywhere. Please stop your attempts at disruptive editing. Guy1890 (talk) 05:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)